GIFT  OF 

THOMAS  FORD  BACON 

MEMORIAL  LIBRARY 


AN  INSIDE  VIEW 

OF  THE 

VATICAN    COUNCIL, 

IN   THE  SPEECH 
OF  THE  MOST  REVEREND 

ARCHBISHOP    KENRICK, 

OF  ST.  LOUIS. 
EDITED  BY 

LEONARD  WOOLSEY  BACON, 
WITH  NOTES  AND  ADDITIONAL  DOCUMENTS, 

INCLUDING : 


THE  SYLLABUS  OF  HIS  HOLINESS  PIUS  IX. 

THE  PROTEST  OF  FATHER  HYACINTHE. 

THE  PROTEST  AND  SPEECHES  OF  BISHOP  STEOSSMAYER. 

THE  APOCRYPHAL  "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP.*' 

THE  ACTS  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

THE  APPEAL  OF  FATHER  HYACINTHE. 

THE  DECLARATION  OF  DR.  DOLLINGER  AND  HIS  ASSOCIATES. 

THE  PROGRAMME  CF  THE  ANTI-INFALLIBILITY,  LEAGUE. 


AMERICAN   TRACT   SOCIETY, 

150  NASSAU-STREET,  NEW  YORK. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER   I. 

THE   MATERIALS   FOE  THE  HISTORY  OF   THE 

COUNCIL. 
Secrecy  of  Proceedings  —  Contradictory  Statements- -A  Decisive 
Document pages  5-13 

CHAPTER   II. 
THE   OBJECT   OF   THE   COUNCIL. 

The  "Liberal  Catholic"  Party— Its  Principles  and  its  Men — 
Speeches  of  Montalembert— The  Absolutist  Party— Its  Princi- 
ples as  denned  by  the  Prince  de  Broglie— Encyclical  "Quanta 
Cuba,"  and  Syllabus - 14-49 

CHAPTER   III. 

THE  PREPARATION  OF   THE  COUNCIL. 

Hopeful  Expectations  of  the  Liberal  Catholics— Packing  of  Pre- 
paratory Committees— Manipulating  of  Public  Opinion— Plan 
of  Acclamation — Publication  of  Janus — Muzzling  of  the  Press  at 
Rome — Gratry's  Letters — Fatheb  Hyacinthe's  Pbotest-  50-60 

CHAPTER   IV. 
THE   COMPOSITION  OF  THE   COUNCIL. 

Modern  Revolution  in  the  Constitution  of  the  Episcopate— Present 
Dependence  of  the  Bishops  on  "the  Nod"  of  the  Pope— Insig- 
nificant Minority  in  the  Church  represented  by  an  Overwhelm- 
ing Majority  in  the  Council -  61-65 

CHAPTER   V. 
THE   CONSTITUTION  OF   THE    COUNCIL. 

First  Code  of  Rules  imposed  on  the  Council— Second  Code— Ex- 
tinction of  Conciliar  Liberty— Protest  of  the  Minority-  -  66-70 

CHAPTER   VI. 
THE  PROCEEDINGS  OF   THE   COUNCIL. 

First  Schema  submitted,  attacked  by  Conolly  and  Strossmayer, 
and  withdrawn  —  Schwarzenberg's  Desires  for  Reformation  — 

284720 


4  CONTENTS. 

Strossmayer's  Second  Speech— Decree  for  Infallibility  pro- 
posed—  Great  Speech  of  Strossmayeb — Immense  Uproar — 
Deceitful  Trick  of  the  Managers — "Observations"  of  the 
Bishops  —  Decree  passed  by  a  Majority  —  Protest  of  the  Mi- 
nority   71  -87 

CHAPTER   VII. 

THE   SPEECH  OF   ARCHBISHOP  KENRICK. 

[See  Contents  and  Analysis  on  pp.  93,  91] 88-174 

CHAPTER   VIII. 

AN  APOCRYPHAL  SPEECH. 

Italian  Origin  of  the  Document— Relations  of  the  Imposture  to 
the  Example  and  Moral  Teachings  of  the  Roman-catholic 
Church— The  Pretended  "Speech  oar  a  Bishop  in  tiik  Coun- 
cil m— No  Papacy  in  the  New  Testament — Nor  in  Early  Church 
History— la  Peter  the  Rock  ?— Former  Popes  Fallible— Peril  of 
the  Church 175  196 

CHAPTER   IX. 

THE   ACTS  OF   THE   COUNCIL. 

The  two  Dogmatic  Constitutions— Canons  on  the  Catholic  Faith— 
Constitution  on  the  Church— Chapter  III. :  On  the  Power  and 
Nature  of  the  Primacy  of  the  Roman  Pontiff — Chapter  1Y. : 
Concerning  the  Infallible  Teaching  of  the  Roman  Pontiff — 
Retroactive  Effect  of  these  Decrees — Former  ex  cathedra  Teach- 
ings now  declared  Infallible— I.  Bull,  Unam  Sanctam — II.  Bull, 
Cum  ex  Apostolatus  Officio — HI.  Bull,  In  Ccena  Domini— IV.  En- 
cyclical, Quanta  Cura,  and  Syllabus — Former  Atrocities  of  Popes 
now  justified — 196-215 

CHAPTER   X. 

THE   SEQUEL   OF   THE   COUNCIL. 

Temporary  Distraction  of  Men's  Minds  from  Religious  Subjects — 
Measures  of  the  Court  of  Rome  for  conciliating  or  whipping 
in  the  Minority  —  The  Quinquennial  Faculties  —  Father  Hya- 
cinthe's  Appeal  to  the  Bishops  —  Dollinger's  Letter  to  his 
Archbishop — Political  Bearings  of  the  Infallibility  Decree — 
Declaration  of  Dollinger  and  his  Associates — Anathema 
and  Excommunication — Programme  of  the  ANTi-lNFALLrBrLiTY 
League— The  Conflict  Begun - 216-250 


THE 


VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


-      CHAPTER   I. 

THE    MATEKIALS    FOR    THE    HISTORY    OF 
THE  VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

The  Vatican  Council  of  the  year  1870,  an  event  of  in- 
terest to  all,  and  especially  to  those  of  every  Christian 
communion,  who  love  the  Kingdom  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  on  the  earth,  is  nevertheless  the  one  event  of  re- 
cent times,  the  history  of  which  is  most  disputed  and 
most  studiously  concealed  from  the  knowledge  of  the 
public. 

The  Council  was  organized  as  a  "secret  society."  At 
the  opening  of  it  an  awful  obligation  was  imposed,  un- 
der severe  penalty,  "  subpcena  gram,"  on  all  its  members, 
binding  them  to  absolute  secrecy  in  everything  pertain- 
ing to  the  Council.  The  members  were  not  allowed  to 
communicate  even  with  each  other  in  print.  Meetings 
for  consultation  of  members  speaking  the  same  lan- 
guage, were  interdicted.  Owing  to  the  extraordinary 
acoustical  properties  of  the  hall  of  the  Council,  it  was 
rare  that  the  transactions  were  heard,  except  by  a  small 


fi,   :  TCE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

part  of  the  members.  The  stenographic  reports  of  daily 
proceedings,  transacted  in  an  unfamiliar  language,  were 
not  printed,  nor  otherwise  submitted  to  the  members 
of  the  Council,  whether  for  their  information  or  for  the 
correction  of  the  record.* 

In  view  of  these  facts,  the  bitter  complaints  of  the 
bishops  belonging  to  the  majority,  and  in  particular  of 
Archbishop  Manning,  of  Westminster,  f  of  the  incorrect- 
ness of  the  published  accounts  of  the  assembly. 
actually  childish.  To  stimulate  public  curiosity  and 
interest  by  every  device  of  advertising — by  announce- 
ments and  manifestoes,  by  parades,  processions,  cos- 
tumes, tableaux,  and  fireworks,  attracting  a  crowd  from 
every  part  of  the  world  to  the  doors  of  the  Council,  and 
then  complain  that  the  event  was  reported  in  the  news- 
papers ;  to  lock  the  doors  in  the  face  of  the  public  and 
shut  off  access  to  information  by  oaths  of  secrecy,  and 
then  complain  that  the  reports  are  not  exacts— is  "  like 
children  crying  in  the  market-place."  If  they  wanted 
no  reports,  why  all  this  advertising  of  a  free  show  of 
parades,  pantomimes,  and  pyrotechny  to  gather  the 
loungers  of  two  hemispheres  in  the  piazza  of  St.  Peter's  ? 
Why  not  go  quietly  about  their  business,  and  have  done 
with  it  ?  If  they  wanted  to  be  correctly  reported,  why 
not  admit  witnesses,  or  remove  the  seal  of  secrecy  ?    The 

*  Ce  qui  se  passe  an  Concile,  48,  59,  62.  The  trustworthiness  of 
this.work  is  disputed  by  interested  parties,  and  indorsed  by  others. 
The  above  statements,  however,  as  well  as  most  other  statements 
made  in  it,  do  not  depend  on  the  authority  of  the  writer,  but  are 
sustained  by  reference  to  unimpeachable  authorities. 

t  See  his  Pastoral,  "The  Vatican  Council,"  pp.  1-33.  Petri 
Privilegium,  3.  One  of  the  last  acts  of  the  Council  was  to  adopt 
a  violent  protest  against  the  reports  in  circulation  concerning  its 
doings.  Ibid.  181.  This  protest,  says  Dr.  Manning,  was  adopted 
"by  an  immense  majority  :"  implying  that  a  minority  more  or  less 
considerable  declined  to  impugn  the  correctness  of  the  reports. 


MATERIALS  FOR  ITS  HISTORY.  7 

conclusion  is  inevitable  :  what  the  managers  of  the 
Council  wanted  was  to  be  incorrectly  reported.  The 
thing  which  they  had  taken  pains  to  secure  was  the 
wide  circulation  of  partial  information  about  their  pro- 
ceedings. The  thing  which  they  had  studied  to  prevent 
was  the  statement  of  the  whole  tr^uth. 

And  yet,  in  the  sweeping  denunciation  of  all  reports, 
of  the  Council  as  utterly  untrustworthy  and  misleading, 
is  to  be  remarked  one  significant  exception.  While  the 
correspondence  of  the  British  newspapers  is  declared 
to  be  simply  imaginative,  founded  on  no  authentic 
knowledge  of  the  facts  whatever,  it  is  confessed  that 
"  the  journals  of  Catholic  countries,"  and  especially  the 
Augsburg  Gazette,  "  understood  what  they  were  pervert- 
ing ;  and  that  they  had  obtained  their  knowledge  from 
sources  which  could  only  have  been  opened  to  them  by 
violation  of  duty."*  By  this  admission,  the  defenders 
of  the  Council  against  the  charges  of  contemporaneous 
history  waive  the  claim  of  superior  knowledge,  and  re- 
solve the  question  at  issue  into  a  simple  question  of 
veracity  between  themselves  and  certain  of  their  col- 
leagues and  associates.  The  number  of  the  witnesses 
is  understood  to  be  "by  an  immense  majority"  in  favor 
of  the  Council.  But  the  weight  of  their  testimony  is 
inevitably  affected  by  the  two  facts  :  first,  that  interests 
which  they  deem  infinite  are  pending  on  their  being  be- 
lieved ;  and  secondly,  that  authority  which  they  hold 
to  be  infallible  justifies  them  in  acts  of  deception  for 
the  advantage  of  the  Church,  f 

*  Archbishop  Manning,  of  Westminster,  Petri  Privilegium,  3, 
pp.  2,  4. 

f  S.  Alphonsi  de  Lig.  Compend.  Theologice  Moralis,  auct.  Ney- 
raguet,  141.  "Z>e  cequivocatione ."  It  is  certified  by  the  pope, 
ex  cathedra,  that  the  writings  of  this  saint  contain  nothing  contrary 
to  sound  doctrine.     The  distinguished  Father  Newman  has,  in  his 


8  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

Having  these  considerations  in  view,  we  may  fairly 
weigh  the  various  external  testimonies  to  the  character 
of  the  Vatican  Council.  These  may  be  represented  on 
the  one  side  by  two  famous  volumes  "  Ce  qui  se  passe 
au  Concile,"*  (Doings  in  the  Council,)  and  the  "Letters 
of  Quirinus  ;"f  on  tliQ  other  side  by  the  pastoral  letter 
of  Archbishop  Manning,  one  of  the  ablest  leaders  of  the 
majority  of  the  Council.  J 

The  former  are  lull  and  detailed  histories,  not  impar- 
tial indeed,  but  accurate  and  exact  for  the  most  part, in 
speaking  of  matters  on  which  we  have  the  means  i  >! 
ingthem,  and  affording  thus  a  fair  presumption  in  their 
favor  as  to  matters  on  which  the  more  than  Masonic 
secrecy  of  the  Council  refuses  us  access  to  testimony. 
They  show,  citing  authority  wherever  it  is  possible,  that 
the  Council  was  deprived  of  the  freedom  of  originating 
measures  and  of  consultation  and  discussion  upon  those 
measures  which  had  been  secretly  prepared  in  advance, 
and  enforced  upon  the  Council ;  that  in  many  ways  un- 
precedented in  such  bodies,  the  power  of  the  poj:>e  was 
brought  to  bear,  both  upon  the  Council  as  a  whole  and 
upon  its  individual  members,  so  depriving  it  of  the  lib- 
erty which,  according  to  the  traditions  of  the  Roman- 
catholic  church,  is  essential  to  the  authority  of  a  gen- 


Apohgia  pro  Vita  Sua,  frankly  purged  himself,  personally,  of  com- 
plicity with  such  morality.  But  this  is  not  sufficient  to  protect  his 
fellow-ecclesiastics  from  the  irresistible  inference  that  what  they 
are  required  to  accept  as  doctrine  will  be  put  in  practice  by  tin  im 
when  occasion  demands. 

*  Published  by  Henri  Hon,  Paris,  1870.  It  is  greatly  to  be  re- 
gretted that  no  translation  of  this  work  is  extant  in  English. 

f  Kivingtons,  London.     Pott,  Young  &  Co, ,  New  York. 

X  Petri  Privilegium  :  Three  Pastoral  Letters  to  the  Clergy  of  the 
Diocese,  1867-1871.  By  Henry  Edward.  Archbishop  of  Westmin- 
ster.    London:  Longmans. 


MATERIALS   FOR   ITS   HISTORY.  9 

eral  council :  and  that  at  the  same  time,  by  processes 
utterly  foreign  to  the  genius  and  antecedents  of  that 
church,  an  outside  pressure  had  been  created  by  the 
systematic  arts  of  the  Jesuits  and  other  orders  cen- 
tering at  Rome,  the  lower  orders  of  clergy  and  the 
laity  having  been  stirred  up  to  affect  and  control  the 
votes  of  the  bishops  set  over  them.  Furthermore,  the 
statements  of  these  books  concur  with  each  other  and 
with  the  common  course  of  public  report,  in  represent- 
ing that  within  the  council-chamber  the  course  of  the 
majority  towards  the  minority  was  in  like  manner  domi- 
neering and  tyrannical,  and  that  the  attempt  of  certain 
bold  speakers  of  the  minority  to  compel  a  hearing  gave 
rise  to  scenes  of  outrageous  disorder  and  confusion  ; 
finally,  that  the  result  sought  by  the  papal  court  and 
the  subservient  majority  was  reached  only  by  the  sud- 
den and  peremptory  shutting  off  of  debate  on  the  main 
question. 

Against  these  statements,  made  in  the  most  circum- 
stantial manner,  by  persons  admitted  by  their  oppo- 
nents to  have  had  access  to  the  facts,  the  defence  set 
up  is  a  sweeping  negative  and  a  general  denunciation 
of  "all  such  things  as  have  been  uttered  in  the  afore- 
said newspapers  and  pamphlets,  as  altogether  false  and 
calumnious,  whether  in  contempt  of  our  holy  father 
and  of  the  apostolic  see,  or  to  the  dishonor  of  this  holy 
synod,  and  on  the  score  of  its  asserted  want  of  legiti- 
mate liberty."*  Archbishop  Manning  declares,  with 
many  bitter  words  concerning  gainsay ers,  that,  "set- 
ting aside  this  one  question  of  opportuneness,  there 
was  not  in  the  Council  of  the  Vatican  a  difference  of 
any  gravity,  and  certainly  no  difference  vlmtsoever  on  any 

*  Protest  of  the  Council,  signed  by  the  cardinals  president, 
Petri  Privilegium,  3.  34.  181. 

1* 


10  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

doctrine  of  faith."  "  Never  was  there  a  greater  unanim- 
ity than  in  the  Vatican  Council."  "  I  have  never  seen 
such  calmness,  self-respect,  mutual  forbearance,  cour- 
tesy, and  self-control  as  in  the  eighty-nine  sessions  of 
the  Vatican  Council."  "  Occasionally  murmurs  of  dis- 
sent were  audible  ;  now  and  then  a  comment  may  have 
been  made  aloud.  In  a  very  few  instances,  and  those 
happily  of  an  exceptional  kind,  expressions  of  strong  dis- 
approval and  of  exhausted  patience  at  length  escaped. 
But  the  descriptions  of  violence,  outcries,  menace,  de- 
nunciation, and  even  of  personal  collisions,  with  which 
certain  newspapers  deceived  the  world,  I  can  affirm  to 
be  calumnious  falsehoods,  fabricated  to  bring  the  Coun- 
cil into  odium  and  contempt."* 

*  Petri  Prtotoghan,  3.  26-28. 

The  writer  proceeds  to  denounce  as  sheer,  deliberate  fabrica- 
tion, the  representation  of  the  Council  as  a  "scene  of  indecent 
clamor  and  personal  violence,  unworthy  even  in  laymen,  criminal 
in  bishops  of  the  church  ;"  and  to  deny  "that  a  tyrannical  major- 
ity deprived  the  minority  of  liberty  of  discussion."  These  expres- 
sions receive  great  light  from  the  speech  of  Archbishop  Kenrick  in 
this  volume.  The  form  of  expression,  "  lean  affirm"  etc.,  is  wor- 
thy of  notice,  in  view  of  the  approved  principle  of  Roman-catholic 
morals  thus  stated  by  St.  Alphonsus  de  Liguori:  "If  a  man  is 
asked  about  something  which  it  is  his  interest  to  conceal,  he  can 
answer,  No,  I  say :  that  is,  /  say  the  icord  No.  Cardenas  doubts 
about  this ;  but  saving  his  better  counsel,  he  seems  to  do  so  with- 
out reason,  for  the  word  I  say  really  has  two  senses  ;  it  means  to 
utter  and  to  assent.  We  here  employ  it  in  the  sense  of  utter. "  Theol. 
Moralis,  4.  151.  A  full  exhibit  of  the  teaching  of  this  approved 
and  authorized  treatise  of  St.  Alphonsus  on  this  point  may  be 
found  in  Meyrick's  "Moral  Theology  of  the  Church  of  Rome," 
republished  with  an  introduction  by  the  Rev.  A.  C.  Coxe,  Balti- 
more, 1856. 

Archbishop  Manning  is  believed  by  those  who  know  him  to  be 
a  man  whose  natural  generosity  and  dignity  of  character  would 
restrain  him  from  such  subterfuge.  It  is  all  the  more  important 
to  be  assured  of  this,  as  it  becomes  manifest  that  the  religious 
teachings  which  he  is  required  to  accept  do  not  so  restrain  him, 


MATEKIALS    FOR  ITS    HISTORY.  11 

In  view  of  these  flat  contradictions  and  mutual  im- 
peachments of  veracity,  it  becomes  most  desirable,  in 
order  to  come  at  the  true  history  of  the  Council,  to  find 
some  witness  or  document  of  decisive  authority.  The 
shorthand  reports  of  its  transactions  and  debates  (if 
such  speech-making  as  was  permissible  under  the  ex- 
traordinary rules  imposed  upon  the  Council  by  the  pope 
may  be  called  debate)  are  secreted  in  its  archives,  to 
be — not  quoted,  but  mysteriously  alluded  to  as  some- 
thing that  ivould  be  very  decisive  if  it  were  allowed  to 
quote  them.*  The  lips  of  the  multitude  of  witnesses 
are  sealed  with  bonds  of  secrecy,  which  can  be  relaxed 
only  by  the  dispensing  authority  of  the  pope,  and  will 
therefore  be  relaxed  only  in  favor  of  the  pope's  own 
party  ;  so  that  "the  bishops  of  the  minority  are  bound 
to  secrecy  for  all  their  lives,  and  the  history  will  never 
be  written  except  by  those  whose  passions  have  precip- 
itated the  issue."  f 

One  document,  however,  of  remarkable  character 
and  unimpeachable  authenticity,  has  providentially 
escaped  from  the  secrecy  that  has  been  wrapped  around 
most  of  the  doings  of  the  Council.  It  is  from  the  pen 
of  the  ablest  of  the  American  bishops — Archbishop 
Kenrick  of  St.  Louis.  It  was  not  intended  to  be  seen 
by  the  public,  much  less  by  the  Protestant  public  ;  but 
was  prepared,  first,  to  be  spoken  in  the  secret  assem- 
bly ;  and  when  that  was  prevented  by  the  sudden  and 

but  have,  in  fact,  the  contrary  tendency.  What  can  we  believe 
from  men  who,  on  the  question  in  hand,  stand  confessed  before 
the  public  as  being  forbidden  to  tell  the  truth,  under  the  most  awful 
sanctions,  and  as  having  a  standing  license  to  deceive  the  public 
"for  a  good  reason" — "and  any  honest  object,  such  as  keeping 
our  goods,  spiritual  or  temporal,  is  a  good  reason. " 
•      *  Petri  Privilegium,  3.  32. 

f  Cfe  <7">  sc  passe  an  Concile,  p.  G2. 


12  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL, 

unanticipated  shutting  off  of  debate,  was  printed,  still 
in  the  Latin  language,  for  private  circulation  among 
the  bishops  of  the  Council.  Its  testimony  on  the  ques- 
tions of  fact  now  in  dispute  before  the  public  is  entirely 
incidental,  being  in  the  form  of  allusions  to  facts  of 
which  the  persons  to  whom  it  was  addressed  had  been 
eye-and-ear  witnesses.  For  this  reason,  its  testimony 
is  all  the  more  impressive — is,  in  fact,  decisive.  It  is 
possible  to  imagine  one  of  the  members  of  the  Council, 
at  a  distance,  in  time  and  space,  from  the  events  of 
which  he  speaks,  under  the  excitement  of  public  dis- 
cussion, under  the  inlluence  of  a  most  unhappy  system 
of  perverted  morality  commended  to  him  by  "infalli- 
ble" authority,  in  the  presence  of  readers  who  have  no 
means  of  testing  his  statements,  to  make  sweeping  gen- 
eral assertions  not  corresponding  with  the  truth.  But 
it  is  not  possible  to  imagine  one  of  the  members  of  the 
Council  laying  in  print,  privately,  under  the  eyes  of  his 
colleagues,  detailed  statements  or  distinct  and  circum- 
stantial allusions  which  they  personally  knew  to  be  false. 
What  bearing,  then,  has  this  decisive  document  on 
the  questions  of  fact  at  issue  between  the  bishops  of 
the  majority  as  represented  by  Archbishop  Manning, 
and  those  of  the  minority  as  represented  in  the  "Let- 
ters of  Quirinus,"  and  in  "  Ce  qui  se  passe  an  Concilet" 
The  question  is  one  of  so  much  moment  to  a  large  part 
of  the  religious  world,  that  the  entire  pamphlet  of  Arch- 
bishop Kenrick  is  now  for  the  first  time  laid  before  the 
public,  in  this  volume,*  that  every  one  may  decide  for 

*  We  had  translated  this  speech  from  the  private  edition  print- 
ed at  Naples  for  circulation  in  the  Council.  But  since  this  work 
was  commenced,  a  copy  has  reached  us  of  the  "  Documenia  ad 
UJustrandum  Concilium  Vaticanum,"  published  at  Nordlingen  bys 
Professor  Friedrich  of  Munich,  which  contains  Kenrick's  speech, 


MATERIALS    FOR   ITS   HISTORY.  13 

himself.  It  is  sufficient  for  the  immediate  purpose  of 
this  Introduction  to  say  that  on  all  those  points  (and 
they  are  many)  of  disputed  fact  between  these  parties, 
on  which  it  gives  light,  it  discredits  the  declarations  of 
the  archbishop  of  Westminster  and  the  solemn  protest 
of  the  majority  of  the  Council,  and  approves  the  sub- 
stantial accuracy  of  the  writings  which  they  denounce 
as  mendacious. 

This  point  being  established,  we  may  proceed  with 
more  confidence  in  our  brief  history. 

in  Latin,  together  with  other  documents  of  the  interior  history  of 
the  Council,  which  tend  still  further  to  confirm  all  the  allegations 
hitherto  made  of  the  oppression  of  the  Council  by  the  court  of 
Rome,  and  of  its  entire  lack  of  that  liberty  which,  according  to 
the  traditions  of  the  Roman-catholic  church  itself,  is  essential  to 
the  authority  of  an  (Ecumenical  Council. 

Only  the  first  part  of  this  important  work  is  yet  published. 
It  contains  : 

1.  The  pamphlet  on  infallibility  distributed  in  the  Council  by 
Bp.  Ketteler,  of  Mayence,  entitled  Qucestio. 

2.  "La  Liberti  du  Concile  et  V  Infaillibiliti"  by  one  of  the  high- 
est ecclesiastics  of  France,  printed  about  June  1,  1870,  to  the  num- 
ber of  only  50  copies,  for  distribution  to  the  Cardinals  exclusively. 

3.  The  Speech  of  Archbishop  Kenrick. 

4.  Eight  Protests  by  bishops  of  the  minority,  presented  at  dif- 
ferent times  in  the  Council. 

5.  The  Order  and  Mode  of  proceedings  in  the  Council  of  Trent. 
G.  Correspondence  between  Cardinals  Schwarzenberg  and  An- 

tonelli ;  and  the  former's  "  Desideria  patribus  Concilii  (Ecumenlci 
proponenda. " 

7.  A  Dissertation  (in  French)  on  a  point  of  casuistry  on  which  the 
writer  seeks  relief,  at  the  hands  of  the  Council,  from  the  common 
rules  imposed  by  Romish  wri'ers  of  Moral  Theology. 


14  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

CHAPTER  II. 
THE  OBJECT  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

By  one  of  the  leading  spirits  of  the  Council  it  has 
been  emphatically  denied  that  "its  one  object  was  to 
define  the  infallibility  of  the  pope."*  And  justly  ;  for 
the  definition  of  infallibility  was  obviously  not  so  much 
an  end,  as  the  means  to  an  end.  What  was  the  defi- 
nite purpose  in  the  minds  of  those  who  projected  and 
controlled  the  Council  was  for  a  long  time  concealed 
from  the  knowledge  of  the  public,  and  even  of  the 
bishops  of  whom  the  Council  was  to  be  composed.  The 
Bull  of  Indiction  of  June  29, 18G8,  dealt  in  the  va 
generalities  of  promised  blessings  to  the  church  and 
the  world.  It  was  not  long  before  simultaneous  opera- 
tions in  all  quarters,  directed  from  a  common  centre, 
for  the  creation  of  a  factitious  public  sentiment  in  favor 
of  the  notion  of  the  infallibility  of  the  pope,  confirmed 
in  the  minds  of  that  party  in  the  church  whose  over- 
throw was  contemplated,  their  suspicions  of  the  real 
object  of  the  convocation.  Since  the  close  of  the 
Council  all  disguise  has  been  dropped,  and  the  tri- 
umphant majority  acknowledges  that  the  object  all 
along  has  been  to  crush  the  "Liberal  Catholic"  party 
in  the  Roman-catholic  church.")* 

AVhat  is,  or  was,  the  Liberal  Catholic  party?     It 

*  Petri  PrivUegium,  3.  34. 

f  See  (out  of  many  examples)  the  Catholic  World  for  August, 
1871,  in  an  article  on  "Infallibility."  It  alleges  as  the  present 
reason  for  the  definition  of  the  new  dogma  that  ' '  numbers  of  good 
and  loyal  Catholics  were  beginning  to  go  astray  after  a  so-called 
Catholic  liberalism,  and  a  clique  of  secret  traitors  was  plotting  a 


OBJECT   OF    THE   COUNCIL.  15 

may  be  described  as  the  fruit  of  that  revival  of  religion 
in  the  Eoman-catholic  church  of  Europe,  and  espe- 
cially of  France,  which  followed  the  transient  stupor  in 
which  that  church  was  left  by  the  shock  of  the  French 
Revolution.  It  was  led  by  certain  men  whose  noble- 
ness and  purity  of  character,  whose  single-minded  zeal 
for  truth  and  righteousness,  and  whose  unfeigned  affec- 
tion towards  the  Roman-catholic  church,  (which,  to 
their  minds,  represented  the  kingdom  of  Christ  upon 
earth,)  none  but  the  most  audacious  partisans  have 
ever  dared  to  question.  Such  a  one,  in  statesmanship 
and  literature,  was  the  late  Count  de  Montalembert : 
such,  in  the  pulpit,  were  Lacordaire  and  Hyacinthe ; 
and  in  the  domain  of  theology,  such  was  the  foremost 
scholar  of  the  Roman  church,  the  illustrious  Dollinger. 
The  eulogists  of  Rome  had  no  prouder  names  than 
these  to  boast  in  all  their  prodigious  roll. 

What  made  these  men  liberals  in  the  Catholic 
church  was  their  serious,  earnest  apprehension  of  the 
fact — so  painful,  yet  so  prevalent  throughout  Roman- 
catholic  countries — of  the  alienation  of  the  great  mass 
of  thoughtful  men  from  the  only  form  of  Christianity 
which  they  know.*  It  seemed  to  them  a  fact  of  sad 
and  fearful  significance,  that  all  the  interests  of  liberty 
and  social  improvement  should  have  been  unnaturally 

revolt  against  the  holy  see,  disguised  under  the  ambiguities  and 
reservations  of  Gallicanism, "  p.  593.  The  significance  of  this 
allegation  cannot  be  fully  appreciated  without  considering  that 
for  several  years  the  Catholic  World  had  been  diligently  commend- 
ing the  men  and  the  principles  of  the  Liberal  Catholic  party  to  the 
American  public,  as  representing  the  real  liberality  of  the  Eoman- 
catholic  church,  and  its  accordance  with  free  government  and 
American  sentiment. 

*  See  the  confession  of  Cardinal  Schwarzenberg,  in  his  ' '  Besi- 
deria  Patribus  Concilii  (Ecumemci  proponenda,"  in  Doc.  ad  Ulustr. 
Gone.  Vat,  p.  285. 


1G  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

divorced  from  the  gospel  ;  and  that  the  church  of 
Christ  should  have  come  to  be  identified,  by  its  minis- 
ters and  by  the  mass  of  the  public,  with  abhorred  sys- 
tems of  civil  and  religious  despotism,  with  the  obso 
lete  horrors  of  the  Inquisition  and  the  dragonnades, 
and  with  Certain  modern  abuses  and  corruptions  which 
seemed  to  them  to  have  no  necessary  connection  with 
the  church  upon  which  they  had  fastened  themselves. 
The  voices  of  these  eloquent  and  earnest  men.  as  they 
sounded  forth  from  the  press.  i*r«»m  the  rostrum,  and 
from  the  historic  pulpit  of  Notre  Dame,  while  they 
bore  brave  witness  lor  God  and  Christ  and  duty,  were 
affected  with  something  of  human  and  Christlike  sym- 
pathy with  the  ills  and  the  aspirations  of  the  society 
in  which  they  lived.       "Their  voiee  was  to  the  sons  of 

men."     It  seemed  a  strange  thing  to  hear  from  under 

the  Dominican  or  Carmelite  frock  any  word  of  gener- 
ous sympathy  towards  those  who  were  seeking,  even  in 
a  wandering  and  hopeless  way,  for  liberty  and 
improvement— any  assurance  that  Christianity  and  the 
church  were  not  necessarily  committed  to  the  side  of 
despotism  and  public  ignorance,  of  religious  persecu- 
tion, the  oppression  of  the  conscience,  the  muzzling  of 
the  press,  the  gagging  of  public  speech.  There  was  a 
power  in  such  utterances  from  the  lips  of  Lacordaire 
and  Hyacinthe,  which  not  even  the  matchless  splendor 
of  their  rhetoric  could  account  for.  The  people  who 
had  learned  to  regard  the  church  and  clergy  as  their 
natural  enemies,  came  in  vast  throngs  about  the  pul- 
pit of  Notre  Dame,  eager  to  listen  to  a  gospel  which, 
while  it  rebuked  and  refuted  their  errors,  and  had  no 
tolerance  for  their  vices,  nevertheless  refused  to  ally 
itself  with  the  advocates  of  hereditary  tyranny,  or  with 
the  apologists  of  obsolete  cruelty. 


OBJECT   OF    THE   COUNCIL.  17 

The  three  characteristic  aims  of  the  Liberal  Catho- 
lic party  can  hardly  be  better  defined  than  in  the  terms 
in  which  the  illustrious  Hyacinthe  summed  up  the  ten- 
dencies of  his  own  preaching  : 

1.  The  reconciliation  of  the  Roman-catholic  church 
with  modern  society. 

2.  Not  by  compromise  of  convictions,  but  by  points 
of  common  belief  and  practice,  and  by  the  spirit  of 
charity,  to  draw  together  the  various  communions  of 
Christian  believers  ;  emphasizing  the  doctrine  of  "the 
soul  of  the  church,"*  which  includes  all  holy  and  be- 
lieving souls,  as  distinguished  from  the  body  or  corpo- 
ration of  the  church,  which  "holds  many  of  the  wolves 
within  its  fold,  and  keeps  many  of  the  lambs  with- 
out, "f 

3.  To  endeavor  to  bring  back  the  Roman-catholic 
church  toward  the  spirit  of  its  early  days.  J 

These  liberal  sentiments  were  associated,  neverthe- 
less, not  only  with  Christian  faith,  but  with  a  most 
hearty  and  loyal  affection  towards  the  Roman-catho- 
lic church,  its  theology  and  government.  The  liberal 
party  was  far  removed  from  sympathy  with  that  "  Gal- 
licanism "  which  would  limit  the  authority  of  the 
church,  in  its  proper  sphere,  by  the  interference  of  any 
political  power  whatever.  That  famous  maxim  of 
Cavour,  which  is  but  the  condensed  expression  of  the 
universal  American  sentiment,  "A  free  church  in  a 
free  state,"  was  an  echo  from  the  lips  of  Montalem- 
bert. 

And  yet  so  ardent  was  the  loyalty  of  this  band  of  fer- 
vid Catholics  towards  the   see  and  the  person  of  the 

*  St.  Augustine.  f  Idem. 

X  Father  Hyacinthe's  Discourses,   vol.    1,   p.   37.     Putnam  Sc 

Sons. 


18  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

pope,  that  they  braved  the  reproach  of  inconsistency 
that  they  might  maintain  with  tongue  and  pen  and 
sword  that  petty  principality  of  the  Roman  state  which 
both  in  theory  and  in  administration  was  the  most  abso- 
lute contradiction  to  all  their  principles.  It  was  due  to 
Montalembert  and  his  associates  that  the  temporal 
power  of  the  pope  was  restored  to  him  by  the  arms  of 
France,  after  its  overthrow  in  1848  :  it  was  due  to  the 
same  party  that  when  later  the  same  temporal  power  was 
threatened  with  something  more  formidable  than  rev- 
olution— with  bankruptcy — the  contribution  of  Peter's 
pence  was  organized  which  stayed  the  doomed  and  tot- 
tering throne  a  few  brief  seasons  longer. 

Notwithstanding  the  fervent  devotion  of  the  Liberal 

Catholics  to  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  they  dncerery 

held  to  be  the  embodiment  <>t'  the  kingdom  <>i'  Christ 
on  the  earth  ;  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  within  their 
slender  number  they  embraced  the  most  illustrious 
names  of  contemporary  Catholicism  ;  notwithstanding 
the  eminent  services  which  they  had  rendered  to  the 
pope  and  see  of  Rome  ;  it  was  impossible  for  their 
principles  of  civil  and  religious  liberty  to  be  conspicu- 
ously taught  in  a  Roman-catholic  country,  without 
drawing  fort^i  against  them  the  outcries  and  the  organiz- 
ed opposition  of  the  hierarchy  and  of  the  religious  orders. 
It  is  difficult  for  us  in  America  to  comprehend  the 
indignation  which  was  roused,  throughout  the  Roman- 
catholic  hierarchy,  by  the  enunciation  in  a  "Catholic 
Congress,"  by  a  French  nobleman,  of  doctrines  of  the 
rights  and  dignity  of  conscience,  of  religious  liberty, 
of  hatred  to  persecution  and  the  Inquisition,  which  are 
familiar  to  American  citizens  as  axioms  of  universal  ac- 
ceptation. The  words  of  Montalembert  in  an  assembly 
of  Catholics  at  Malines  were  these  : 


OBJECT   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  19 

"  Of  all  liberties  which  I  have  undertaken  to  defend, 
the  most  precious  in  my  view,  the  most  sacred,  the  most 
legitimate,  the  most  necessary,  is  liberty  of  conscience. 
....  I  must  confess  that  this  enthusiastic  devotion 
of  mine  to  religious  liberty  is  not  general  among  Cath- 
olics. They  are  very  fond  of  it  for  themselves — which 
is  no  great  merit.  Generally  speaking,  everybody  likes 
every  sort  of  liberty  for  himself.  But  religious  liberty 
for  its  own  sake,  the  liberty  of  other  men's  consciences, 
the  liberty  of  that  worship  which  men  denounce  and 
repudiate — this  is  what  disturbs  and  enrages  many  of 

us Are  we  at  liberty,   now-a-days,  to  demand 

liberty  for  the  truth — that  is,  for  ourselves  (for  every 
honest  man  believes  what  he  holds  to  be  the  truth)  and 
refuse  it  to  error — that  is,  to  persons  who  differ  from  us  ? 

I  answer  flatly,  No I  feel  an  invincible   horror 

at  all  punishments  and  all  violences  inflicted  on  man- 
kind under  pretence  of  serving  or  defending  religion. 
The  fagots  lighted  by  the  hands  of  Catholics  are  as  hor- 
rible to  me  as  the  scaffolds  on  which  Protestants  have 
immolated  so  many  martyrs.  The  gag  in  the  mouth  of 
any  sincere  preacher  of  his  own  faith,  I  feel  as  if  it  were 
between  my  own  lips,  and  it  makes  me  shudder  with 
distress."* 

In  the  United  States  it  was  possible  for  such  senti- 
ments from  Roman-catholic  presses  or  platforms  to 
pass  without  official  rebuke,  or  even  to  stand  unchal- 
lenged, and  be  ostentatiously  put  forward  as  the  accept- 
ed doctrine  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  But  in  countries 
where  opinion  was  divided,  where  great  political  inter- 

*  The  entire  passage,  which  is  full  of  genuine  eloquence,  is 
quoted  in  De  Pressense's  article  on  Parties  in  the  Catholic  Church 
in  France,  appended  to  volume  I.  of  the  Discourses  of  Father  Hya- 
ciuthc. 


20  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

ests  involved  in  the  maintenance  of  th<  doc- 

trines of  absolutism  and  persecution,  were  wont  to  count 
on  the  undivided  support  of  the  Romish  hierarchy,  it 
was  not  possible.  The  most  that  the  Roman-catholic 
friends  of  civil  and  religions  liberty  in  Europe  could 
have  hoped,  for  their  opinions,  was  that  they  should  be 
tolerated.     But  even  this  hope  was  disappointed.41 

*  We  have  given  above  the  position  of  the  Liberal  Catholic  par- 
Lefined  by  themselves,    it  is  well  to  add  their  account 
position  of  the  opposite  party,  as  briefly  summed  up  in  an  article 
in  the  Gorrespondant,  a  few  years  since,  by  the  Prince  de  Broglie. 

According  to  him  the  position  of  the  ultramontane  party  is.  "that 
the  Church   is  the   declared  enemy  (1)  of  hnm  .    (2)   of 

modern  soc'n  ty.  (3)  of  religious  liberty,  (I)  of  political  liberty." 

1.  Enmity  to  Human  Reason.  "  This  enmity  docs  not  display 
itself  merely  by  the  tone  of  detraction  and  irony  with  which  it 
pursues  all  the  efforts  and  acts  of  human  reason,  by  its  shouts  of 
triumph  on  every  occasion  when  reason  stumbles  and  goes  wrong. 

There  are  besides  whole  systems  of  philosophy  connected,  which 
.stop  short  of  nothing  less  than  denying  reason  the  faculty  of  investi- 
gating even  a  shadow  of  truth  without  the  aid  of  faith;  and  these  arc 
Bystems  around  which  ultramontanism  throws  all  its  credit  and  affec- 
tion. In  a  word,  whenever  these  new  champions  of  the  church 
of  reason,  one  would  say  that  they  saw  passing  before  their  i 
enemy  whom  they  menace  with  every  hostile  look  and  gesture,  and 
upon  whom  they  are  ever  ready  to  precipitate  themselves  headlong." 

2.  Enmity  to  Modem  Society. — "The  same  doctrines  which  in- 
culcate enmity  to  human  reason,  profess  unmitigated  hostility  to 
the  constitution  of  modern  society  as  based  on  that  reason.  No 
one  can  therefore  flatter  himself  that  he  can  remain  a  member  of 
the  spiritual  communion  of  Christians,  and  of  temporal  sod 

at  present  constituted  in  France,  on  the  principles  of  17S9;  And 
this  hostility  between  modern  society  and  the  church,  so  eagerly 
pointed  out  and  insisted  on  by  the  infidel,  the  party  we  speak  of 
accepts  without  the  smallest  hesitation,  in  all  its  bearings,  and  fol- 
lows out  into  all  its  applications.  In  its  eyes,  all  modern  society 
comes  excommunicated  into  the  world — no  baptism  can  wash  away 
the  stain  on  its  first  origin.  All  is  bad,  anti-Christian,  anti-Catho- 
lic, in  the  principles  of  modern  society." 

3.  Enmity  to  Religious  Liberty.  —  "In  all  that  infidelity  has  repeat- 
ed on  the  subject,  I  do  not  remember  ever  to  have  met  with  any- 


OBJECT    OF    THE    COUNCIL.  21 

The  speeches  of  Montalembert  at  Malines  were  pro- 
nounced in  August,  1863.  On  the  8th  of  December, 
1864,  was  issued  from  the  Vatican  the  Encyclical  Let- 
ter entitled  "  Quanta  Cura"  to  which  was  appended  the 
famous  "  Syllabus"  of  propositions  condemned  by  Pope 
Pius  IX.  in  various  pontifical  documents.  In  its  terms, 
this  edict  applies  to  all  liberal  thought  and  opinion  hi 

thing  so  precisely  and  accurately  laid  down,  as  what  we  may  now 
read  every  day  in  the  columns  of  the  contemporary  religious  press. 
It  has  cut  short  all  debate  by  a  summary  process,  and  has  declared 
dogmatically  civil  intolerance  to  be  an  article  of  faith  for  every 
Catholic,  and  religious  liberty  to  be  heresy.  The  church  chastises 
heretics  by  force,  when  she  can — where  she  can — as  much  as  she 
can.  If  she  tolerates  them  anywhere,  it  is  as  one  tolerates  a 
necessary  evil,  with  the  intention  only  of  freeing  oneself  from  it  on 
the  first  opportunity  ;  but  she  never  can  accept  religious  liberty  as 
a  principle  of  Christian  duty.  Intolerance  is  her  right  the  mo- 
ment it  becomes  possible.  No  lapse  of  time  can  raise  prescription 
against  her — no  promise  bind  her  ;  witness  Louis  XIV.  and  the 
edict  of  Nantes.  Such  is  the  theory  we  may  now  see  every  day 
professed  by  these  religious  controversialists. " 

4.  Enmity  to  Political  Liberty.  —  "A  stale  calumny,  which  infi- 
delity itself  blushed  for,  and  now  only  ventured  to  whisper,  con- 
sisted in  representing  the  church  as  the  natural  ally  of  tyranny  and 

the  born  adversary  of  all  public  liberty The  new  style  of 

religious  controversy  of  which  we  speak  has  resuscitated  it,  and  in 
our.  day  of  storms  and  disaster,  hastened  voluntarily  to  proclaim  a 
solemn  divorce  between  religion  and  national  liberty Ultra- 
montane controversy  has  excommunicated  liberty  from  the  tribu- 
nal of  religion  herself,  has  preached  absolute  power  as  a  dogma, 
has  equally  proscribed  every  guarantee  of  individual  and  civil  lib- 
erty as  the  fruit  of  human  pride,  and  abandoned  every  restriction 
preservative  of  public  right. " 

Allowance  may  be  made  for  this  statement  of  the  questions  at 
issue,  as  proceeding  from  one  of  the  parties  to  the  controversj7. 
But  the  manifesto  of  the  opposite  party,  in  the  "Encyclical  and 
Syllabus,"  substantially  accepts  this  statement.  The  issue  made 
up  between  the  two  parties,  to  be  tried  in  general  council,  was 
whether  those  sentiments  which  are  the  universal  sentiments  of 
American  society  and  American  Christianity  are  to  be  tolerated 
within  the  pale  of  the  Roman-catholic  church. 


22  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

all  parts  of  the  world.  It  condemns  ull  those  convic- 
tions  concerning  human  rights  and  duties  which  under- 
lie the  best  results  of  modern  civilization,  and  which  are 
incorporated  with  all  the  habits  of  American  thought 
and  the  fabric  of  American  government.  But  the  time 
of  its  issue;  and  the  forms  of  expression  used  in  it  made 
it  clear  to  men  of  every  party  that  it  was  aimed  at  the 
Liberal  party  in  the  Catholic  church.  • 

It  was  unfortunate  that  a  document  in  which  the 
American  people  have  so  practical  an  interest  should 
have  been  published  at  a  time  when  all  our  minds  were 
absorbed  in  the  pending  question  of  our  national  exist- 
ence. If  it  had  been  issued  in  a  time  of  peace  and 
quiet,  its  astounding  enunciations  would  have  produced 
a  wholesome  shock  upon  the  public  mind.  But  amid 
the  excitements  of  that  critical  period,  it  slipped  into 
its  place  among  the  documents  of  past  history,  with  so 
little  attention  from  the  community  that  it  is  important 
for  us  to  reproduce  it  here. 

ENCYCLICAL  "QUANTA  CUR  A,"  AND  SYLLABUS. 

To  Our  Venerable  Brethren,  the  Patriarchs,  Primates,  Archbishops, 
and  Bishops  of  the  Universal  Church  having  Grace  and  Com- 
munion of  the  Apostolic  See, 

PIUS  PP.  IX. 

HEALTH  AND  APOSTOLIC  BENEDICTION. 

It  is  well  known  unto  all  men,  and  especially  to  you, 
venerable  brethren,  with  what  great  care  and  pastoral 
vigilance  our  predecessors,  the  Roman  pontiffs,  have 
discharged  the  office  intrusted  by  Christ  our  Lord  to 
them  in  the  person  of  the  most  blessed  Peter,  prince  of 
the  apostles,  and  have  unremittingly  discharged  the 
duty  of  feeding  the  lambs  and  sheep,  and  have  dili- 
gently nourished  the  Lord's  entire  flock  with  the  words 


ENCYCLICAL  AND   SYLLABUS.  23 

of  faith,  imbued  it  with  salutary  doctrine,  and  guarded 
it  from  poisoned  pastures.  And  those,  our  predeces- 
sors, who  were  the  assertors  and  champions  of  the 
august  Catholic  religion,  truth  and  justice,  being  as  they 
were  chiefly  solicitous  for  the  salvation  of  souls,  held 
nothing  to  be  of  so  great  importance  as  the  duty  of 
exposing  and  condemning,  in  their  most  wise  letters  and 
constitutions,  all  heresies  and  errors  which  are  hostile 
to  moral  honesty  and  to  the  eternal  salvation  of  man- 
kind, and  which  have  frequently  stirred  up  terrible  com- 
motions and  have  damaged  both  the  Christian  and  civil 
commonwealths  in  a  disastrous  manner.  "Wherefore 
those  our  predecessors  have,  with  apostolic  fortitude, 
continually  resisted  the  nefarious  attempts  of  unjust 
men,  who,  like  raging  waves  of  the  sea  foaming  forth 
their  own  confusion  and  promising  liberty  whilst  they 
are  the  slaves  of  corruption,  endeavored  by  their  false 
opinions  and  most  pernicious  writings  to  overthrow 
the  foundations  of  the  Catholic  religion  and  of  civil 
society,  to  abolish  all  virtue  and  justice,  to  deprave 
the  souls  and  minds  of  all  men,  and  especially  to  per- 
vert inexperienced  youth  from  uprightness  of  morals,  to 
corrupt  them  miserably,  to  lead  them  into  snares  of 
error,  and  finally  to  tear  them  from  the  bosom  of  the 
Catholic  church. 

And  now,  venerable  brethren,  as  is  also  very  well 
known  to  you — scarcely  had  we  (by  the  secret  dispensa- 
tion of  Divine  Providence,  certainly  by  no  merit  of  our 
own)  been  called  to  this  chair  of  Peter,  when  we,  to  the 
extreme  grief  of  our  soul,  beheld  a  horrible  tempest 
stirred  up  by  so  many  erroneous  opinions,  and  the 
dreadful,  and  never-enough-to-be-lamented  mischiefs 
which  redound  to  Christian  people  from  such  errors  : 
and  we  then,  in  discharge  of  our  apostolic  ministerial 


24  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

office,  imitating  the  example  of  our  illustrious  prede- 
cessors, raised  our  voice,  and  in  several  published  encyc- 
lical letters,  and  in  allocutions  delivered  in  cons: 
and  in  other  apostolical  ndemned  the  prom- 

inent, most  grievOUfl  errors  of  the  age,  and  avc  stirred 
ii]>  your  excellent  episcopal  vigilance,  and  again  and 
again  did  we  admonish  and  exhort  all  the  sons  of  the 
Catholic  church,  who  are  most  dear  to  us,  that  they 
should  abhor  and  shun  all  the  said  errors  as  they  would 
the  contagion  of  a  fatal  pestilence.  Especially  in  our 
first  encyclical  letter,  written  to  you  on  the  !»th  of  No- 
vember, anno  1846,  and  in  two  allocutions,  one  of  which 
was  delivered  by  us  in  consistory  on  the  9th  of  1>> 
her,  anno  186  I.  and  the  other  on  the  9th  of  June,  anno 

1862,  we  condemned  the  monstrous  and  portentous  opin- 
ions which  prevail  especially  in  the  present  age  to  the 

very  great  loss  of  souls,  and  even  to  the  detriment  of  civil 
society  ;  and  which  are  in  the  highest  degree  hostile, 
not  only  to  the  Catholic  church  and  to  her  salutary  doc- 
trine and  venerable  laws,  bat  also  to  the  everlasting  lawr 
of  nature  engraven  by  (xod  upon  the  hearts  of  all  men, 
and  to  right  reason  ;  and  out  of  which  almost  all  other 
errors  originate. 

Now  although  hitherto  we  have  not  omitted  to  de- 
nounce and  reprove  the  chief  errors  of  this  kind,  yet 
the  cause  of  the  Catholic  church  and  the  salvation  of 
souls  committed  to  us  by  God,  and  even  the  interests 
of  human  society,  absolutely  demand,  that  once  again 
we  should  stir  up  your  pastoral  solicitude  to  drive  away 
other  erroneous  opinions  which  flowr  from  those  errors 
above  specified,  as  their  source.  These  false  and  per- 
verse opinions  are  so  much  the  more  detestable  by  how 
much  they  have  chiefly  for  their  object  to  hinder  and 
banish  that  salutary  influence  which  the  Catholic  church, 


ENCYCLICAL  AND  SYLLABUS.       25 

by  the  institution  and  command  of  her  Divine  Author, 
ought  freely  to  exercise,  even  to  the  consummation  of  the 
world,  oyer  not  only  individual  men  but  nations,  peo- 
ples, and  sovereigns — and  to  abolish  that  mutual  coop- 
eration and  agreement  of  counsels  between  the  priest- 
hood and  governments  which  has  always  been  propi- 
tious and  conducive  to  the  welfare  both  of  church  and 
state.  (Gregory  XVI.  Encyclical,  13th  August,  1832.) 
You  are  well  aware  that  at  this  time,  there  are  not  a 
few  who  apply  to  civil  society  the  impious  and  absurd 
principle  of  naturalism,  as  they  term  it,  and  dare  to  teach 
that  "  the  welfare  of  the  state  and  political  and  social 
progress  require  that  human  society  should  be  consti- 
tuted and  governed  irrespective  of  religion,  which  is  to 
be  treated  just  as  if  it  did  not  exist,  or  as  if  no  real  dif- 
ference existed  between  true  and  false  religions."  Con- 
trary to  the  teaching  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  of  the 
church,  and  of  the  holy  fathers,  these  persons  do  not 
hesitate  to  assert  that  "  the  best  condition  of  human 
society  is  that  wherein  no  duty  is  recognized  by  the 
government  of  correcting  by  enacted  penalties  the  vio- 
lators of  the  Catholic  religion,  except  when  the  main- 
tenance of  the  public  peace  requires  it."  From  this 
totally  false  notion  of  social  government,  they  fear  not 
to  uphold  that  erroneous  opinion  most  pernicious  to 
the  Catholic  church  and  to  the  salvation  of  souls,  which 
was  called  by  our  predecessor  Gregory  XVI,  above 
quoted,  the  insanity,  (Encycl.,  13th  August,  1832,)  (deli- 
ramentum,)  namely,  that  "liberty  of  conscience  and  of 
worship  is  the  right  of  every  man  ;  and  that  this  right 
ought,  in  every  well-governed  state,  to  be  proclaimed 
and  asserted  by  the  law  ;  and  that  the  citizens  possess 
the  right  of  being  unrestrained  in  the  exercise  of  every 
kind  of  liberty,  by  any  law,  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  so  that 

V.iti.Hii  Council.  ._ 


26  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

they  are  authorized  to  publish  and  put  forward  openly, 
all  their  ideas  whatsoever,  either  by  speaking,  in  print, 
or  by  any  other  method."  But  whilst  these  men  make 
these  rash  assertions,  they  do  not  reflect  or  consider 
that  they  preach  the  liberty  of  perdition,  (St.  Augustine, 
Epistle  10.*),  al.  1G(>,)  and  that,  "if  it  is  always  five  to 
human  arguments  to  discuss,  men  will  never  be  want- 
ing who  will  dare  to  resist  the  truth,  and  to  rely  upon 
the  loquacity  of  human  wisdom,  when  we  know  from 
the  command  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  how  faith  and 
Christian  wisdom  ought  to  avoid  this  most  mischievous 
vanity."  (St.  Leo,  Epistle  164,  al.  133,  sec.  2,  Boll  ed.  | 
And  since  religion  has  been  banished  from  civil  gov- 
ernment; since  the  teaching  and  authority  of  divine 
revelation  have  been  repudiated,  the  idea  inseparable 
therefrom  of  justice  and  human  right  is  obscured  by 
darkness  and  lost,  and  in  place  of  true  justice  and  legit- 
imate right  material  force  is  substituted,  whence  it  ap- 
pears why  some,  entirely  neglecting  and  slighting  the 
most  certain  principles  of  sound  reason,  dare  to  pro- 
claim "that  the  will  of  the  people,  manifested  by  pub- 
lic opinion,  (as  they  call  it,)  or  by  other  means,  consti- 
tutes a  supreme  law  independent  of  all  divine  and 
human  right  ;  and  that,  in  the  political  order,  accom- 
plished facts,  by  the  mere  met  of  their  having  been 
accomplished,  have  the  force  of  right."  But  who  does 
not  plainly  see  and  understand  that  human  society, 
released  from  the  ties  of  religion  and  true  justice,  can 
have  no  other  purpose  than  to  compass  its  own  ends, 
and  to  amass  riches,  and  can  follow  no  other  law  in  its 
actions  than  the  indomitable  wickedness  of  a  heart  given 
up  to  the  service  of  its  selfish  pleasures  and  interests  ? 
For  this  reason  also  these  same  men  persecute  with  such 
bitter  hatred  the  religious  Orders  who  have  deserved  so 


ENCYCLICAL  AND  SYLLABUS.  27 

well  of  religion,  civil  society,  and  letters ;  they  loudly 
declare  that  the  Orders  have  no  right  to  exist,  and,  in 
so  doing,  make  common  cause  with  the  falsehoods  of 
the  heretics.  For,  as  was  most  wisely  taught  by  our 
predecessor  of  illustrious  memory,  Pius  VI.,  "the  abo- 
lition of  religious  Orders  injures  the  state  of  public  pro- 
fession of  the  evangelical  counsels;  injures  a  mode  of  life 
recommended  by  the  church  as  in  conformity  with  apos- 
tolical doctrine ;  does  wrong  to  the  illustrious  founders 
whom  we  venerate  upon  our  altars,  and  who  constituted 
these  societies  under  the  inspiration  of  God."  (Epistle 
to  Cardinal  de  la  Kochefoucauld,  March  10,  1791.) 

And  these  same  persons  also  impiously  pretend  that 
citizens  should  be  deprived  of  the  liberty  of  publicly 
bestowing  on  the  church  their  alms  for  the  sake  of 
Christian  charity,  and  that  the  law  forbidding  "ser- 
vile labor  on  account  of  divine  worship  "  upon  certain 
fixed  days  should  be  abolished  upon  the  most  fallacious 
pretext  that  such  liberty  and  such  law  are  contrary  to 
the  principles  of  political  economy.  Not  content  with 
abolishing  religion  in  public  society,  they  desire  further 
to  banish  it  from  families  and  private  life.  Teaching 
and  professing  those  most  fatal  errors  of  socialism  and 
communism,  they  declare  that  "  domestic  society  or  the 
family  derives  all  its  reason  of  existence  solely  from  civil 
law,  whence  it  is  to  be  concluded  that  from  civil  law  de- 
scend and  depend  all  the  rights  of  parents  over  their 
children,  and,  above  all,  the  right  of  instructing  and 
educating  them. "  By  such  impious  opinions  and  machi- 
nations do  these  most  false  teachers  endeavor  to  elimi- 
nate the  salutary  teaching  and  influence  of  the  Catholic 
church  from  the  instruction  and  education  of  youth, 
and  to  miserably  infect  and  deprave  by  every  pernicious 
error  and  vice  the  tender  and  pliant  minds  of  youth. 


28  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

All  those  who  endeavor  to  throw  into  confusion  both 
religious  and  political  affairs.  to  destroy  the  good  order 
of  society,  and  to  annihilate  all  divine  and  human  rights, 
have  always  exerted  all  their  criminal  schemes,  atten- 
tion, and  efforts  apon  the  manner  in  which  they  might, 
above  all.  deprave  and  delude  unthinking  youth,  as  we 

have  already  shown  :  it  is  upon  the  corruption  of  youth 
that  they  place  all  their  hopes.      Thus  they  never  cease 

to  attack  by  every  method  the  clergy,  both  secular  and 
regular,  from  whom,  as  testify  to  us  in  so  conspicuous 

a  manner  the  mosl  certain  records  of  history,  such  con- 
siderable benefits  have  been  bestowed  in  abundance 

upon  Christian  and  civil  society  and  upon   the  republic 

of  Letters  ;  asserting  of  the  clergy  in  general,  that  they 

are  the  enemies  of  the  useful  sciences,  of  progress,  and 

of  civilization,  and  that  they  ought  to  be  deprived  of 
all  participation  in  the  work  of  teaching  and  training 
the  young. 

Others,  reviving  the  depraving  fictions  of  innova- 
tors, errors  many  times  condemned,  presume  with  ex- 
traordinary impudence,  to  subordinate  the  authority  of 
the  church  and  of  this  apostolic  see,  conferred  upon  it 
by  Christ  our  Lord,  to  the  judgment  of  civil  authority, 
and  to  deny  all  the  rights  of  this  same  church  and  this 
see  with  regard  to  those  things  which  appertain  to  the 
secular  order.  For  these  persons  do  not  blush  to  affirm 
"  that  the  laws  of  the  church  do  not  bind  the  conscience 
if  they  are  not  promulgated  by  the  civil  power  ;  that 
the  acts  and  decrees  of  the  Roman  pontiffs  concerning 
religion  and  the  church  require  the  sanction  and  appro- 
bation, or  at  least  the  assent,  of  the  civil  power  ;  and 
that  the  apostolic  constitutions  (Clement  XII.,  Bene- 
dict XXV.,  Pius  VII.,  Leo  XII.)  condemning  secret  so- 
cieties, whether  these  exact  or  do  not  exact  an  oath  of 


ENCYCLICAL  AND  SYLLABUS.       29 

secrecy,  and  branding  with  anathema  their  followers  and 
partisans,  have  no  force  in  those  countries  of  the  world 
where  such  associations  are  tolerated  by  the  civil  gov- 
ernment." It  is  likewise  affirmed  "  that  the  excommu- 
nications launched  by  the  council  of  Trent  and  the  Ro- 
man pontiffs  against  those  who  invade  and  usurp  the 
possessions  of  the  church  and  its  rights,  strive,  by  con- 
founding the  spiritual  and  temporal  orders  to  attain 
solely  a  mere  earthly  end  ;  that  the  church  can  decide 
nothing  which  may  bind  the  consciences  of  the  faithful 
in  the  temporal  order  of  things  ;  that  the  right  of  the 
church  is  not  competent  to  restrain  with  temporal  pen- 
alties the  violators  of  her  laws  ;  and  that  it  is  in  accord- 
ance with  the  principles  of  theology  and  of  public  law 
for  the  civil  government  to  appropriate  property  pos- 
sessed by  the  churches,  the  religious  orders,  and  other 
pious  establishments."  And  they  have  no  shame  in 
avowing  openly  and  publicly  the  heretical  statement 
and  principle  from  which  have  emanated  so  many  errors 
and  perverse  opinions,  "that  the  ecclesiastical  power  is 
not  by  the  law  of  God  made  distinct  from  and  indepen- 
dent of  civil  power,  and  that  no  distinction,  no  inde- 
pendence of  this  kind  can  be  maintained  without  the 
church  invading  and  usurping  the  essential  rights  of  the 
civil  power."  Neither  can  we  pass  over  in  silence  the 
audacity  of  those  who,  not  enduring  sound  doctrine, 
assert  that  "the  judgments  and  decrees  of  the  holy 
see,  the  object  of  which  is  declared  to  concern  the  gen- 
eral welfare  of  the  church,  its  rights,  and  its  discipline  ; 
do  not  cla;m  acquiescence  and  obedience  under  pain  of 
sin  and  loss  of  the  Catholic  profession,  if  they  do  not 
treat  of  the  dogmas  of  faith  and  of  morals." 

How  contrary  is  this  doctrine  to  the  Catholic  dogma 
of  the  plenary  power  divinely  conferred  on  the  sover- 


30  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

eign  pontiff  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  to  guide  to  super- 
vise, and  govern  the  universal  church,  no  one  can  fail  to 
sec  and  understand  clearly  and  evidently. 

Amid  so  great  a  perversity  of  depraved  opinions, 
remembering  our  apostolic  duty,  and  solicitous  before 
all  things  for  our  most  holy  religion,  for  sound  doctrine, 
for  the  saltation  of  the  souls  confided  to  us,  and  for  the 
welfare  of  human  society  itself,  hare  considered  the 
moment  opportune  to  raise  anew  our  apostolic  voice. 
Therefore  do  we  by  our  apostolic  authority  reprobate, 
denounce,  and  condemn  generally  and  particularly  all 
the  evil  opinions  and  doctrines  specially  mentioned  in 

this  letter,  and  we  wish  that  they  may  he  held  as  rep- 
robated, denounced,  and  condemned  by  all  the  children 
of  the  Catholic  church. 

But  you  know  further,  venerable  brethren,  that  in 
our  time  the  haters  of  all  truth  ami  justice  and  violent 

enemies  of  our  religion  have  spread  abroad  other  impi- 
ous doctrines  by  means  of  pestilent  books,  pamphlets, 
and  journals,  which,  distributed  over  the  surface  of  the 
earth,  deceive  the  people  and  wickedly  lie.  You  are 
not  ignorant  that  in  our  day  men  are  found  who,  ani- 
mated and  excited  by  the  spirit  of  Satan,  have  arrived 
at  that  excess  of  impiety  as  not  to  fear  to  deny  our  Lord 
and  Master  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  attack  his  divinity  with 
scandalous  persistence.  And  here  we  cannot  abstain 
from  awarding  you  well-merited  praise,  venerable  breth- 
ren, for  all  the  care  and  zeal  with  which  you  have  raised 
your  episcopal  voice  against  so  great  an  impiety. 

And  therefore  in  this  present  letter,  we  speak  to  you 
with  all  affection  ;  to  you  who,  called  to  partake  our 
cares,  are  our  greatest  support  in  the  midst  of  our  very 
great  grief,  our  joy  and  our  consolation,  by  reason  of 
the  excellent  piety  of  wThich  you  give  'proof  in  main- 


ENCYCLICAL   AND   SYLLABUS.  31 

taining  religion,  and  the  marvellous  love,  faith,  and  dis- 
cipline with  which,  united  by  the  strongest  and  most 
affectionate  ties  to  us  and  this  apostolic  see,  you  strive 
valiantly  and  accurately  to  fulfil  your  most  weighty  epis- 
copal ministry.  We  do  then  expect  from  your  excellent 
pastoral  zeal  that,  taking  the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  which 
is  the  word  of  God,  and  strengthened  by  the  grace  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  you  will  watch  with  redoubled 
care,  that  the  faithful  committed  to  your  charge  "  ab- 
stain from  evil  pasturage,  which  Jesus  Christ  doth  not 
till,  because  his  father  hath  not  planted  it."  (St.  Ignat. 
M.  ad  Philadelph.  St.  Leo,  Epist.  156,  al.  125.)  Never 
cease,  then,  to  inculcate  on  the  faithful  that  all  true  hap- 
piness for  mankind  proceeds  from  our  august  religion, 
from  its  doctrines  and  practice,  and  that  that  people  is 
happy  who  have  the  Lord  for  their  God.  (Psalm  143.) 
Teach  them  "  that  kingdoms  rest  upon  the  foundation 
of  the  Catholic  faith,  (St.  Celest.  Epist.  22,  ad.  Syn. 
Eph.,)  and  that  nothing  is  so  deadly,  nothing  so  certain 
to  engender  every  ill,  nothing  so  exposed  to  danger,  as 
for  men  to  believe  that  they  stand  in  need  of  nothing 
else  than  the  free  will  which  we  received  at  birth,  if  we 
ask  nothing  further  from  the  Lord — that  is  to  say,  if 
forgetting  our  Author,  we  abjure  his  power  to  show  that 
we  are  free."  And  do  not  omit  to  teach  "  that  the  royal 
power  has  been  established  not  only  to  exercise  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  world,  but,  above  all,  for  the  protection 
of  the  church,  (St.  Leo,  Epist.,  156  al.  125,)  and  that 
there  is  nothing  more  profitable  and  more  glorious  for 
the  sovereigns  of  states  and  kings  than  to  leave  the 
Catholic  church  to  exercise  its  laws,  and  not  to  permit 
any  to  curtail  its  liberty  ;"  as  our  most  wise  and  coura- 
geous predecessor,  St.  Felix,  wrote  to  the  Emperor  Zeno. 
"It  is  certain  that  it  is  advantageous  for  sovereigns, 


\Y1  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

when  the  cause  of  God  is  in  question,  to  submit  their 
royal  will  according  to  his  ordinance,  to  the  priests  of 
Jesus  Christ,  and  not  to  prefer  it  before  them."  (Pius 
VII.  Epist.  Encycl.,  Diu  satis,  15th  May,  1800.) 

And  if  always,  so,  especially  at  present,  is  it  our 
duty,  venerable  brethren,  in  the  midst  of  the  numerous 
calamities  of  the  church  and  of  civil  society,  iii  view 
of  the  terrible  conspiracy  of  our  adversaries  against 

the  Catholic  church  and  this  apostolic  see,  and  the  great 
accumulation  of  errors,  it  is  before  all  things  necessary 
to  go  with  faith  to  the  Throne  of  <  trace  to  obtain  mer- 
cy and  find  grace  in  timely  aid.  We  have  therefore 
judged  it  right  to  excite  the  piety  of  all  the  faithful  in 
order   that,  with    us  and  with   you   all,  they  may  pray 

without  ceasing  to  the  Father  <>f  lights  and  of  mercies, 

supplicating  and  beseeching  him  fervently  and  humbly  ; 

in  order  also  that  in  the  plenitude  of  their  faith  they  may 
seek  refuge  in  our  Lord  JeSus  Christ  who  has  redeemed 
us  to  God  with  his  blood,  that  by  their  earnest  and  con- 
tinual prayers  they  may  obtain  from  that  most  dear 
heart,  victim  of  burning  charity  for  us,  that  it  would 
draw  all  by  the  bonds  of  his  love,  and  that  all  men 
being  inflamed  by  his  holy  love  may  live  according  to 
his  heart,  pleasing  God  in  all  thing's  and  being  fruitful 
in  all  good  works. 

But,  as  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  prayers  most 
agreeable  to  God  are  those  of  the  men  who  approach 
him  with  a  heart  pure  from  all  stain,  we  have  thought 
it  good  to  open  to  Christians,  with  apostolic  liberality, 
the  heavenly  treasures  of  the  church  confided  to  our  dis- 
pensation, so  that  the  faithful,  more  strongly  drawn  tow- 
ards true  piety  and  purified  from  the  stain  of  their  sins 
by  the  sacrament  of  penance,  may  more  confidently  offer 
up  their  prayers  to  God  and  obtain  his  mercy  and  grace. 


ENCYCLICAL   AND    SYLLABUS.  33 

By  these  letters  emanating  from  our  apostolic  author- 
ity, we  grant  to  all  and  each  of  the  faithful  of  both 
sexes  throughout  the  Catholic  world,  a  plenary  indul- 
gence in  the  manner  of  a  jubilee,  during  one  month, 
up  to  the  end  of  the  coming  year  1865,  and  not  longer, 
to  be  carried  into  effect  by  you,  venerable  brethren,  and 
the  other  legitimate  local  ordinaries,  in  the  form  and 
manner  laid  down  at  the  commencement  of  our  sover- 
eign pontificate  by  our  apostolical  letters,  in  form  of  a 
brief,  dated  the  20th  of  November,  anno  1846,  and  sent 
to  the  whole  episcopate  of  the  world,  commencing  with 
the  words,  "  Arcano  divincB  providential  concilio,"  and 
with  the  faculties  given  by  us  in  those  same  letters.  We 
desire,  however,  that  all  the  prescriptions  of  our  letters 
shall  be  observed,  saving  the  exceptions  we  have  de- 
clared are  to  be  made.  And  we  have  granted  this,  not- 
withstanding all  which  might  make  to  the  contrary,  even 
those  worthy  of  special  and  individual  mention  and 
derogation  ;  and  in  order  that  every  doubt  and  diffi- 
culty may  be  removed,  we  have  ordered  that  copies  of 
those  letters  should  be  again  forwarded  to  you. 

"Let  us  implore,  venerable  brethren,  from  our  in- 
most hearts,  and  with  all  our  souls,  the  mercy  of  God. 
He  has  encouraged  us  so  to  do,  by  sa3'ing  :  '  I  will  not 
withdraw  my  mercy  from  them.'  Let  us  ask  and  we 
shall  receive  ;  and  if  there  is  slowness  or  delay  in  its 
reception,  because  we  have  grievously  offended,  let  us 
knock,  because  to  him  that  knocketh  it  shall  be  opened — 
if  our  prayers,  groans,  and  tears,  in  which  we  must  per- 
sist and  be  obstinate,  knock  at  the  door— and  if  our 
pra}Ter  be  united.  Let  each  one  pray  to  God,  not  for 
himself  alone,  but  for  all  his  brethren,  as  the  Lord  hath 
taught  us  to  pray."  (St.  C}Tprian,  Epistle  11.)  But, 
in  order  that  God  may  accede  more  casilv  to  our  and 


34  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

your  prayers,  and  to  those  of  all  his  faithful  servants, 
let  us  employ  in  all  confidence  as  our  mediatrix  with 
him,  the  Virgin  Mary,  mother  of  God,  who  "  has  de- 
stroyed all  heresies  throughout  the  world,  and  who, 
the  most  loving  mother  of  us  all,  is  very  gracious  .... 
and  full  of  mercy  ....  allows  herself  to  be  entreated 
by  all,  shows  herself  most  clement  towards  all,  and 
takes  under  her  pitying  care  all  our  necessities  with  a 
most  ample  affection,"  (St.  Bernard,  Serm.  de  duodeoim 
prerofjafiri.<  />.  M.  V.,  ex  verbis  Apocalyp. ;)  and  who,  "  sit- 
ting as  queen  upon  the  right  hand  of  her  only  begotten 
son  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  a  golden  vestment  clothed 
around  with  various  adornments."  there  is  nothing  which 
she  cannot  obtain  from  him.  Let  us  implore  also  the 
intervention  of  the  blessed  Peter,  chief  of  the  apostles, 
and  of  his  co-apostle  Paul,  and  of  all  those  saints  of 
heaven,  who,  having  already  become  the  friends  of 
God,  have  been  admitted  into  the  celestial  kingdom, 
where  they  are  crowned  and  bear  palms,  and  who  hence- 
forth certain  of  their  own  immortality,  are  solicitous  for 
our  salvation. 

In  conclusion,  we  ask  of  God  from  our  inmost  soul 
the  abundance  of  all  his  celestial  benefits  for  you,  and 
wre  bestow  upon  you,  venerable  brethren,  and  upon  all 
faithful  clergy  and  laity  committed  to  your  care,  our 
apostolic  benediction  from  the  most  loving  depths  of 
our  heart,  in  token  of  our  charity  towards  you. 

PIUS  PP.  IX. 
Given  at  Kome  from  St.  Peter's,  this  8th  of  December,  1864, 
1        the  tenth. anniversary  of  the  Dogmatic  Definition  of  the 
Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  Mother  of 
God,  in  the  nineteenth  year  of  our  Pontificate. 


ENCYCLICAL   AND    SYLLABUS.  35 

The  Syllabus  of  the  principal  errors  of  our  time,  which  are  stig- 
matized in  the  Consistorial  Allocutions,  Encyclicals,  and  other 
Apostolical  Letters  of  our  Most  Holy  Father,  Pope  Pius  IX. 

I.    PANTHEISM,  NATURALISM,  AND  ABSOLUTE  RATIONALISM. 

1.  There  exists  no  divine  power,  supreme  being, 
wisdom,  and  providence  distinct  from  the  universe,  and 
God  is  none  other  than  nature,  and  is  therefore  muta- 
ble. In  effect,  God  is  produced  in  man  and  in  the 
world,  and  all  things  are  God,  and  have  the  very  sub- 
stance of  God.  God  is  therefore  one  and  the  same 
thing  with  the  world,  and  thence  spirit  is  the  same 
thing  with  matter,  necessity  with  liberty,  true  with 
false,  good  with  evil,  justice  with  injustice.  (Allocution 
Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862.) 

2.  All  action  of  God  upon  man  and  the  world  is  to 
be  denied.    (Allocution  Maxima  q u idem,  9th  June,  1862. ) 

3.  Human  reason,  without  airy  regard  to  God,  is  the 
sole  arbiter  of  truth  and  falsehood,  of  good  and  evil  ; 
it  is  its  own  law  to  itself,  and  suffices  by  its  natural  force 
to  secure  the  welfare  of  men  and  of  nations.  (Allocu- 
tion Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862.) 

4.  All  the  truths  of  religion  are  derived  from  the 
native  strength  of  human  reason  ;  whence  reason  is  the 
master  rule  by  which  man  can  and  ought  to  arrive  at 
the  knowledge  of  all  truths  of  every  kind.  (Encyclical 
Letters,  Qui  pluribus,  9th  November,  1846  ;  Singulari 
quidem,  17th  March,  1856  ;  and  the  Allocution  Maxima 
quidem,  9th  June,  1862.) 

5.  Divine  revelation  is  imperfect,  and,  therefore, 
subject  to  a  continual  and  indefinite  progress,  which 
corresponds  with  the  progress  of  human  reason.  (En- 
cyclical Qui  pluribus,  9th  November,  1846,  and  the  Al- 
locution Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862.) 

6.  Christian  faith  is  in  opposition  to  human  reason, 


86  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

and  divine  revelation  not  only  docs  not  benefit,  but  even 
injures  the  perfection  of  man.  (Encyclical  Qui  plwri- 
buB,  Oth  November,  1840,  and  the  Allocution  Maxima 
quidem,  9th  June,  18G2.) 

7.  The  prophecies  and  miracles,  uttered  and  narra- 
ted in  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  are  the  fictions  of  poets  ; 
and  the  mysteries  of  the  Christian  faith  arc  the  result  of 
philosophical  invest Igations.  In  the  books  of  the  two 
Testaments  there  are  contained  mythical  inventions, 
and  Jesus  Christ  is  himself  a  mythical  tiction.  (Encyc- 
lical Qui  2>hn-ih>/s,  Oth  November,  1846,  and  the  Allo- 
cution Maxima  quidem,  0th  June,  1862.) 

II.   MODERATE  nation aj.ism. 

8.  As  human  reason  is  placed  on  a  level  with  reli- 
gion, so  theological  matters  must  be  treated  in  the  same 
manner  as  philosophical  ones.  (Allocution  Sing  atari 
qufidam  perfusi,  Oth  December,  1854.) 

0.  All  the  dogmas  of  the  Christian  religion  are,  with- 
out exception,  the  object  of  natural  science  or  philoso- 
phy, and  human  reason,  instructed  solely  by  history,  is 
able,  by  its  own  natural  strength  and  principles,  to  ar- 
rive at  the  true  knowledge  of  even  the  most  abstruse 
dogmas  :  provided  such  dogmas  be  proposed  as  subject 
matter  for  human  reason.  (Letter  ad  Archiep.  Frising. 
Gravissimas,  11th  December,  18G2 — to  the  same,  Tuas 
libenter,  21st  December,  1863.) 

10.  As  the  philosopher  is  one  thing,  and  philosophy 
is  another,  so  it  is  the  right  and  duty  of  the  philosopher 
to  submit  himself  to  the  authority  which  he  shall  have 
recognized  as  true  ;  but  philosophy  neither  can  nor 
ought  to  submit  to  any  authority.  (Letter  ad  Archiep. 
Frising.  Gravissimas,  11th  December,  1862 — to  the 
same,  Tuas  libenter,  21st  December,  1863.) 

11.  The  church  not  onlv  ought  never  to  animadvert 


ENCYCLICAL    AND    SYLLABUS.  37 

upon  philosophy,  but  ought  to  tolerate  the  errors  of 
philosophy,  leaving  to  philosophy  the  care  of  their  cor- 
rection. (Letter  ad  Archiep.  Frising.  11th  Decem- 
ber, 1862.) 

12.  The  decrees  of  the  apostolic  see  and  of  the  Ro- 
man congregation  fetter  the  free  progress  of  science. 
(Id.  Ibid.) 

13.  The  method  and  principles  by  which  the  old 
scholastic  doctors  cultivated  theology,  are  no  longer 
suitable  to  the  demands  of  the  age  and  the  progress  of 
science.     (Id.  Tuas  libenter,  21st  December,  1863.) 

14.  Philosophy  must  be  treated  of  without  any  ac- 
count being  taken  of  supernatural  revelation.   (Id.  Ibid. ) 

N.  B.  To  the  rationalistic  system  belong,  in  great 
part,  the  errors  of  Anthony  Gunther,  condemned  in 
the  letter  to  the  cardinal  archbishop  of  Cologne,  Ex- 
wniam  (nam,  June  15, 1857  ;  and  in  that  to  the  bishop 
of  Breslau,  Dolore  hand  mediocri,  April  30,  1860. 

III.    INDIFFERENTISM,  LATITFDIXARIANISM. 

15.  Every  man  is  free  to  embrace  and  profess  the 
religion  he  shall  believe  true,  guided  by  the  light  of  rea- 
son. (Apostolic  Letters,  Multiplices  inter,  10th  June, 
1851  ;  Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862.) 

16.  Men  may  in  any  religion  find  the  way  of  eternal 
salvation,  and  obtain  eternal  salvation.  (Encyclical  Let- 
ter, Qui  pluribus,  9th  November,  1846  ;  Allocution, 
Ubi  primum,  17th  December,  1847  ;  Encyclical  Letter, 
Singidari  quidem,  17th  March,  1856.) 

17.  We  may  entertain  at  least  a  well-founded  hope 
for  the  eternal  salvation  of  all  those  who  are  in  no  man- 
ner in  the  true  church  of  Christ.  (Allocution  Singulari 
quadam,  9th  December,  1854  ;  Encyclical  letter,  Quanta 
confieiamur,  10th  August,  1863.) 


c8  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

18.  Protestantism  is  nothing  more  than  another 
form  of  the  same  true  Christian  religion,  in  which  it  is 
possible  to  be  equally  pleasing  to  God  as  in  the  Catho- 
lic church.  (Encyclical  letter,  Noscitis  et  rwbiacum,  8th 
December,  1849.) 

IV.    socialism,  cummin  ism,  BBCBSX  sociktils,  l;li;i.ic\l.   - 
HIS,   CLERICO-LIBERAL  SOCIETIES. 

Pests  of  this  description  are  frequently  rebuked  in 
the  severest  terms  in  the  Encye.  Qui  pluribus,  Nov.  9, 
1846  ;  Alloc.  Quibus  quantisque,  April  20,  1849  ;  Encyc 
NosciHa  <1  Nobi8Cum}  Dec.  8, 1849  ;  Alloc.  Singulori  qvA- 
dam,  Dec.  9,  1S54  ;  Encyc.  Quanto  confidamut^  mcerore, 
Aug.  10,  1868. 

V.  ERRORS  CONCKKMNO  THE   CHUBCH  AND  HEB  KK.liTs. 

19.  The  church  is  not  a  true,  and  perfect,  and  en- 
tirely free  society,  nor  docs  she  enjoy  peculiar  and  per- 
petual rights  conferred  upon  her  by  her  Divine  Founder, 
but  it  appertains  to  the  civil  power  to  define  what  are 
the  rights  and  limits  with  which  the  church  may  exer- 
cise authority.  (Allocution  Singulari  quadam,  9th  De- 
cember, 1854  ;  MuUisgravibusque,  17th  December,  18G0; 
Maxima  <jUt<l<'m,  9th  June,  1802.) 

20.  The  ecclesiastical  power  must  not  exercise  its 
authority  without  the  permission  and  assent  of  the  civil 
government.  (Allocution,  Memimi  unusquisque,  30th 
September,  1861.) 

21.  The  church  has  not  the  power  of  denning  dog- 
matically that  the  religion  of  the  Catholic  church  is 
the  only  true  religion.  (Apostolic  Letter,  Multiplices 
infer,  10th  June,  1851.) 

22.  The  obligation  which  binds  Catholic  teachers 
and  authors  applies  only  to  those  things  which  are  pro- 
posed for  universal  belief  as  dogmas  of  the  faith,  by 


ENCYCLICAL   AND    SYLLABUS.  39 

the  infallible   judgment  of  the  church.      (Letter     ad 
Arehiep.  Frising.     Tuas  libenter,  21st  Dec,  1863.) 

23.  The  Roman  pontiffs  and  oecumenical  councils 
have  exceeded  the  limits  of  their  power,  have  usurped 
the  rights  of  princes,  and  have  even  committed  errors 
in  denning  matters  of  faith  and  morals.  (Apost.  Let- 
ter, Multipliers  inter,  10th  June,  1851.) 

24.  The  church  has  not  the  power  of  availing  her- 
self of  force,  or  any  direct  or  indirect  temporal  power. 
(Letter  Apost.  Ad  Ajwstoliece,  22d  Aug.,  1851. ) 

25.  In  addition  to  the  authority  inherent  in  the 
episcopate,  a  further  and  temporal  power  is  granted  to 
it  by  the  civil  authority,  either  expressly  or  tacitly, 
which  power  is  on  that  account  also  revocable  by  the 
civil  authority  whenever  it  pleases.  (Letter  Apost.  Ad 
Apostdica,  22d  Aug.,  1851.) 

26.  The  church  has  not  the  innate  and  legitimate 
right  of  acquisition  and  possession.  (Allocution  Nun- 
quamfore,  15th  Dec,  1856.  Encyclical  Inrredibili,  17th 
Sept.,  1863.) 

27.  The  ministers  of  the  church  and  the  Roman 
pontiff  ought  to  be  absolutely  excluded  from  all  charge 
and  dominion  over  temporal  affairs.  (Allocution  Max- 
ima quidem,  9th  June,  1862.) 

28.  Bishops  have  not  the  right  of  promulgating 
even  their  apostolical  letters,  without  the  permission  of 
the  government.  (Allocution  Nunqvam  fore,  15th  De- 
cember, 1856.) 

29.  Dispensations  granted  by  the  Roman  pontiff 
must  be  considered  null,  unless  they  have  been  asked 
for  by  the  civil  government.     (Id.  Ibid.) 

30.  The  immunity  of  the  church  and  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal persons  derives  its  origin  from  civil  law.  (Apost. 
M\tl#plices  inter,  10th  June,  1851.) 


40  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

31.  Ecclesiastical  courts  for  temporal  causes,  oi 
the  clergy,  whether  civil  or  criminal,  ought  by  all  c 

to  be  abolished,  even  without  the  concurrence  and 
against  the  protest  of  the  holy  see.  (Allocution  Acer- 
Ummum,  27th  September,  L862  ;  Alloc.  Nunquam  fore, 
15th  December,  1866.) 

32.  The  personal  immunity  exonerating  the  clergy 
from  military  service  may  be  abolished,  without  viola- 
tion either  of  natural  right  or  of  equity.  Its  aboli- 
tion is  called  for  by  civil  progress,  especially  in  a  com- 
munity constituted  upon  principles  of  liberal  govern- 
ment. (Letter  to  the  archbishop  of  Montreal,  Singula- 
v/'s  habisque,  29th  September,  1864.) 

33.  It  does  not   appertain  exclusively  to  ecclesiasti- 
cal jurisdiction,  by  any  right;  proper  and  inherent,  to 
direct  the  teaching  of  theological  subjects.     (Lett 
Archiep.  Frtiing.     TuazJfSbenter,  21st  December,  1863.) 

34  The  teaching  of  those,  who  compare  the  » 
eigU  pontiff  to  a  free  sovereign  acting  in  the  universal 
church,   is  a   doctrine  which  prevailed   in   the  middle 
ages.    (letter  Apost.  Ad  ApostQliocB,  22d  August,  1851.  "> 

35.  There  would  be  no  obstacle  to  the  sentence  of 
a  general  council,  or  the  act  of  all  the  universal  peoples, 
transferring  the  pontifical  sovereignty  from  the  bishop 
and  city  of  Rome  to  some  other  bisho}:>ric  and  some 
other  city.     (Id.  Ibid. ) 

36.  The  definition  of  a  national  council  does  not 
admit  of  any  subsequent  discussion,  and  the  civil  power 
can  regard  as  settled  an  affair  decided  by  such  national 
council.     (Id.  Ibid.) 

37.  National  churches  can  be  established,  after  be- 
ing withdrawn  and  plainly  separated  from  the  authority 
of  the  Roman  pontiff.  (Alloc.  Multis  gravibusque,  17th 
Pec.,  186*0  ;  Jamdudum  cernimw,  18th  March,  1861.) 


ENCYCLICAL   AND   SYLLABUS.  41 

38.  Roman  pontiffs  have,  by  their  too  arbitrary  con- 
duct, contributed  to  the  division  of  the  church  into 
eastern  and  western.  (Letter  Apost.  Ad  Apostoliece, 
22d  August,  1851.) 

VI.    ERRORS  ABOUT  CIVIL  SOCIETY,  CONSIDERED  BOTH  IN  ITSELF 
AND  IN  ITS   RELATION   TO    THE    CHURCH. 

39.  The  republic  is  the  origin  and  source  of  all  rights, 
and  possesses  rights  which  are  not  circumscribed  by 
any  limits.  (Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June, 
1862.) 

40.  The  teaching  of  the  Catholic  church  is  o}:>posed 
to  the  well-being  and  interests  of  society.  (Encyclical 
Qui  pluribus,  9th  November,  184G  ;  Allocution  Quibus 
qnantisque,  20th  April,  1849.) 

41.  The  civil  power,  even  when  exercised  by  an  in- 
fidel sovereign,  possesses  an  indirect  and  negative  power 
over  religious  affairs.  It  therefore  possesses  not  only 
the  right  called  that  of  exequatur,  but  that  of  the  (so- 
called)  appeUatio  ab  abusu*  (Apostolic  Letter,  Ad 
Apostoliece,  22d  August,  1801.) 

42.  In  the  case  of  conflicting  laws  between  the  two 
powers,  the  civil  law  ought  to  prevail.  (Letter  Apost. 
Ad  Apostoliece,  22d  August,  1851.) 

43.  The  civil  power  has  a  right  to  break,  and  to  de- 
clare and  render  null  the  conventions  (commonly  called 
concordats)  concluded  with  the  apostolic  see,  relative 
to  the  use  of  rights  appertaining  to  the  ecclesiastical 
immunity,  without  the  consent  of  the  holy  see,  and  even 
contrary  to  its  protest.  (Allocution  In  consisloriali,  1st 
November,  1850.  Mutt  is  r/raeibuxque,  17th  December, 
1860. 

*  The  power  of  authorizing  official  acts  of  the  papal  power, 
and  of  correcting  the  alleged  abuses  of  the  same, 


42  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

44.  The  civil  authority  may  interfere  in  matters  re- 
lating to  religion,  morality,  and  spiritual  government 
Hence  it  has  control  over  the  instructions  for  the  guid- 
ance of  consciences  issued,  conformably  with  their  mis- 
sion, by  the  pastors  of  the  church.  Further,  it  pos- 
sesses power  to  decree,  in  the  matter  of  administering 
the  divine  sacraments,  as  to  the  dispositions  necessary 

for  their  reception.      (Allocution   ///  oonsUforiali,  1st 

November,  1850  ;  Allocution  Maxima  quidem^  9th  June, 
1862.) 

45.  The  entire  direction  of  public  schools,  in  which 
the  youth  of  Christian  states  are  educated,  except  (to 
a  certain  extent)  in  the  case  of  episcopal  seminaries, 
may  and  must  appertain  to  the  civil  power,  and  belong 
to  it  so  far,  that  no  other  authority  whatsoever  shall  be 
recognized  as  having  any  right  to  interfere  in  the  disci- 
pline of  the  schools,  the  arrangement  of  the  studies,  the 
taking  of  degrees,  or  the  choice  and  approval  of  the 
teachers.  (Allocution  In  consisioriali,  1st  Nov.,  I860  ; 
Allocution  Quibus  lucttumssimis,  5th  Sept.,  1851.) 

4G.  Much  more,  even  in  clerical  seminaries,  the 
method  of  study  to  be  adopted  is  subject  to  the  civil 
authority.  (Allocution  Nunquamfore,  15th  December, 
185(5.) 

47.  The  best  theory  of  civil  society  requires,  that 
popular  schools  open  to  the  children  of  all  classes,  and 
generally,  all  public  institutes  intended  for  instruction 
in  letters  and  philosophy,  and  for  conducting  the  edu- 
cation of  the  young,  should  be  freed  from  all  ecclesias- 
tical authority,  government,  and  interference,  and 
should  be  fulry  subject  to  the  civil  and  political  power, 
in  conformity  with  the  will  of  rulers  and  the  prevalent 
opinions  of  the  age.  (Letter  to  the  archbishop  of  Fri- 
bourg.  Quum  non  sine,  14th  July,  1864.) 


ENCYCLICAL   AND    SYLLABUS.  43 

48.  This  system  of  instructing  youth,  which  consists 
in  separating  it  from  the  Catholic  faith  and  from 
the  power  of  the  church,  and  in  teaching  exclusively, 
or  at  least  primarily,  the  knowledge  of  natural  things 
and  the  earthly  ends  of  social  life  alone,  may  be  approv- 
ed by  Catholics.     (Id.  Ibid.) 

49.  The  civil  power  has  the  right  to  prevent  minis- 
ters of  religion,  and  the  faithful,  from  communicating 
freely  and  mutually  with  each  other,  and  with  the  Roman 
pontiff.     (Allocution  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862.) 

50.  The  secular  authority  possesses,  as  inherent  in 
itself,  the  right  of  presenting  bishops,  and  may  require 
of  them  that  they  take  possession  of  their  dioceses,  be- 
fore having  received  canonical  institution  and  the  apos- 
tolic letters  from  the  holy  see.     (Allocution  Nunquam 

fore,  15th  December,  1856.) 

51.  And  further,  the  secular  government  has  the 
right  of  deposing  bishops  from  their  pastoral  functions, 
and  it  is  not  bound  to  obey  the  Roman  pontiff  in  those 
things  which  relate  to  episcopal  sees  and  the  institu- 
tion of  bishops.  (Letter  Apost.  MuttipHqea  inter,  10th 
June,  1851 ;  Allocution  Acerbissimum,  27th  Sept.,  1852.) 

52.  The  government  has  of  itself  the  right  to  alter 
the  age  prescribed  by  the  church  for  the  religious  pro- 
fession, both  of  men  and  women  ;  and  it  may  enjoin 
upon  all  religious  establishments  to  admit  no  person  to 
take  solemn  vows  without  its  permission.  (Allocution 
Nunquam  fore,  15th  Dec,  1856.) 

53.  The  laws  for  the  protection  of  religious  estab- 
lishments, and  securing  their  rights  and  duties,  ought 
to  be  abolished :  nay  more,  the  civil  government  may 
lend  its  assistance  to  all  who  desire  to  quit  the  religious 
life  they  have  undertaken,  and  break  their  vows.  The 
government  may  also  suppress  religious  orders,  colle- 


44  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

giate  churches,  and  simple  benefices,  even  those  belong- 
ing to  private  patronage,  and  submit  their  goods  and 
revenues  to  the  administration  and  disposal  of  the  civil 

power.  (Allocution  Acerbissimum,  27th  Sept,  1852; 
Allocution  Probe  memineritis,  22d  January,  is.").")  ;  Allo- 
cution Cum  scBpe,  26th  July,  1855.) 

54.  Kings  and  princes  are  not  only  exempt  from  the 

jurisdiction  of  the  church,  but  are  superior  to  the 
church,  in  litigated  questions  of  jurisdiction.  (Letter 
Apost.  Multiplier  inter,  10th  June,  1851.) 

55.  The  church  ought  to  be  separated  from  the  state, 

and  the  state   from  the  church.      (Allocution  Acerbtigi- 

mum,  27th  September,  1S52.) 

VII.    ERBOBS  I  i  CHBIgTIAN  ETHICS. 

.")«"..  Moral  laws  do  not  stand  in  need  of  the  divine 
sanction,  and  there  is  no  necessity  that  human  laws 
should  be  conformable  to  the  law  of  nature,  and  receive 
their  sanction  from  God.      (Allocution  M  lidem, 

9th  June,  1802.) 

57.  Knowledge  of  philosophical  things  and  morals, 
and  also  civil  laws,  may  and  must  be  independent  of 
divine  and  ecclesiastical  authority.  (Allocution  Maxi- 
ma quidem,  9th  June,  18G2.) 

58.  No  other  forces  are  to  be  recognized  than  those 
which  reside  in  matter  ;  and  all  moral  teaching  and 
moral  excellence  ought  to  be  made  to  consist  in  the  ac- 
cumulation and  increase  of  riches  by  every  possible 
means,  and  in  the  enjoyment  of  pleasure.  (Allocution 
Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862  ;  Encyclical  Quanta 
eonficiamur,  10th  August,  1863.) 

59.  Right  consists  in  the  material  fact,  and'all  human 
duties  are  but  vain  words,  and  all  human  acts  have  the 
force  of  right.     (Alloc.  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. ) 


ENCYCLICAL    AND    SYLLABUS.  45 

60.  Authority  is  nothing  else  but  the  result  of  nu- 
merical superiority  and  material  force.  (Allocution 
Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862. ) 

61.  An  unjust  act,  being  successful,  inflicts  no  injury 
upon  the  sanctity  of  right.  (Allocution  Jamdudum  cer- 
nimus,  18th  March,  1861.) 

62.  The  principle  of  non-intervention,  as  it  is  called, 
ought  to  be  proclaimed  and  adhered  to.  (Allocution 
Novo8  et  ante,  28th  September,  1860.) 

63.  It  is  allowable  to  refuse  obedience  to  legitimate 
princes  :  nay  more,  to  rise  in  insurrection  against  them. 
(Encyclical  Quipluribus,  9th  November,  1846  ;  Allocu- 
tion Quisque  vestrum,  4th  October,  1847  ;  Encyclical 
Nbacitis  et  nobiscum,  8th  December,  1849  ;  Letter  Apos- 
tolus  Cum  Catholica,  26th  March,  1860.) 

64.  The  violation  of  a  solemn  oath,  even  every  wick- 
ed and  flagitious  action  repugnant  to  the  eternal  law,  is 
not  only  not  blamable,  but  quite  lawful,  and  worthy  of 
the  highest  praise,  when  done  for  the  love  of  country. 
(Allocution  Quibus  quantisque,  20th  April,  1849.) 

VIII.    ERRORS   CONCERNING   CHRISTIAN   MARRIA.GE. 

65.  It  cannot  be  by  any  means  tolerated,  to  main- 
tain that  Christ  has  raised  marriage  to  the  dignity  of  a 
sacrament.  (Apostolical  Letter,  Ad  Apostolicce,  22d 
August,  1851.) 

G(y.  The  sacrament  of  marriage  is  only  an  adjunct 
of  the  contract,  and  separable  from  it,  and  the  sacra- 
ment itself  consists  in  the  nuptial  benediction  alone. 
(Id.  Ibid.) 

67.  By  the  law  of  nature,  the  marriage  tie  is  not  in- 
dissoluble, and  in  many  cases  divorce,  properly  so  call- 
ed, may  be  pronounced  by  the  civil  authority.  (Id. 
Ibid  ;  Allocation  Acei'bissim urn,  27th  September,  1852.) 


46  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

68.  The  church  has  not  the  power  of  Laying  down 
what  arc  diriment  impedimenta  to  marriage.     The  civil 

authority  does  possess  such  a  power,  and  can  do  away 
with  existing  impedimenta  to  marriage.  (Let.  Apost. 
MultipHces  inter,  10th  June,  1851.) 

69.  The  church  only  commenced  in  later  ages  to 
bring  in  diriment  impediments,  and  then  availing  her- 
self of  a  right  not  her  own,  but  borrowed  from  the  civil 
power.     (Let,  Apis  .  A<i  Apostolicce,  22d  Aug.,  1851.) 

70.  The  canons  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  which  pro- 
nounce censure  of  anathema  against  those  who  deny  to 

the  church  tlie  right  of  laying  down  what  are  diriment 

impedimenta,  either  are  not  dogmatic  ormust  he  under- 
stood as  referring  only  to  such  borrowed  power.  (Let. 
Apost.  Ibid.) 

71.  The  form  of  Bolemnizing  marriage  prescribed  by 
the  said  Council,  under  penalty  of  nullity,  does  not  bind 
in  cases  where  the  civil  law  lias  appointed  another  form, 
and  where  it  decrees  that  this  new  form  shall  effectuate 
a  valid  marriage.      (Id.  Ibid.) 

72.  Boniface  Vlii.  is  the  first  who  declared,  that  the 
vow  of  chastity  pronounced  at  ordination  annuls  nup- 
tials.     (Id.  Ibid.) 

i:\.  A  merely  civil  contract  may,  among  Christians, 
constitute  a  true  marriage  ;  and  it  is  false,  either  that 
the  marriage  contract  between  Christians  is  always  a 
sacrament,  or  that  the  contract  is  null  if  the  sacrament 
be  excluded.  (Id.  Ibid.,  Letter  to  King  of  Sardinia, 
9th  September,  1852;  Allocution  Acerbissimum,  '27th 
Sept.,  1852  ;  Multis  gravibusque,  17th  Dec,  1860.) 

71.  Matrimonial  causes  and  espousals  belong  by 
their  very  nature  to  civil  jurisdiction.  (Let.  Apost.  Ad 
Apostolical,  22d  August,  1851  ;  Allocution  Acerbistdmunij 
27th  September,  1852.) 


ENCYCLICAL   AND   SYLLABUS.  47 

N.  B.  Two  other  errors  may  tend  in  this  direction, 
those  upon  the  abolition  of  the  celibacy  of  priests,  and 
the  preference  due  to  the  state  of  marriage  over  that  of 
virginity.  These  have  been  proscribed  ;  the  first  in  the 
Encyclical  Qui  pluribus,  Nov.  9,  1846  ;  the  second  in 
the  Letters  Apostolical  Multiplices  inter,  June  10, 
1851. 

IX.    ERRORS    REGARDING    THE  CIVIL  POWER  OF    THE   SOVEREIGN 
PONTIFF. 

75.  The  children  of  the  Christian  and  Catholic 
church  are  not  agreed  upon  the  compatibility  of  the 
temporal  with  the  spiritual  power.  (Let.  Apost.  Ad 
Apostolicce,  22d  August,  1851. ) 

76.  The  abolition  of  the  temporal  power,  of  which 
the  apostolic  see  is  possessed,  would  contribute  in  the 
greatest  degree  to  the  liberty  and  prosperity  of  the 
church.     (Alloc.  Quibus  quanlisque,  20th  April,  1849.) 

N.  B.  Besides  these  errors,  explicitly  noted,  many 
others  are  impliedly  rebuked  by  the  proposed  and  as- 
serted doctrine,  which  all  Catholics  are  bound  most 
firmly  to  hold,  touching  the  temporal  sovereignty  of  the 
Roman  pontiff.  These  doctrines  are  clearly  stated  in 
the  Allocutions  Quibus  quantisque,  20th  April,  1849  ; 
and  Si  semper  antea,  20th  May,  1850  ;  Letter  Apost. 
Quum  Catholica  Ecclesia,  26th  March,  1860  ;  Allocu- 
tions Novos,  28th  Sept.,  1860  ;  Jamdudum,  18th  March, 
1861,  and  Maxima  quidem,  9th  June,  1862 

X.    ERRORS  HAVING  REFERENCE  TO  MODERN  LIBERALISM. 

77.  In  the  present  day,  it  is  no  longer  expedient  that 
the  Catholic  religion  shall  be  held  as  the  only  religion 
of  the  state,  to  the  exclusion  of  all  other  modes  of  wor- 
ship.    (Allocution  Nemo  vestrum,  26th  July,  1855.) 

78.  Whence  it  has  been  wisely  provided  by  law,  in 


48  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

some  countries  called  Catholic,  that  persona  coining  to 
reside  therein  shall  enjoy  the  public  exercise  of  their 
own  worship.  (Allocution  Acerbitarimum,  27th  Septem- 
ber, 1852.) 

79.  Moreover  it  is  false,  that  the  civil  liberty  of  every 
mode  of  worship,  and  the  full  power  given  to  all  of 
overtly  and  publicly  manifesting  their  opinions  and 
their  ideas,  of  all  kinds  whatsoever,  conduce  more  easily 
to  corrupt  the  morals  and  minds  of  the  people,  and  to 
the  propagation  of  the  pest  of  indifferentism.  (Allo- 
cution Nunquamfore,  loth  December,  1850.) 

80.  The  Roman  pontiff  can  and  ought  to  reconcile 
himself  to,  and  agree  with  progress,  liberalism,  and 
civilization  as  lately  introduced.  (Allocution  Jamdu- 
dum  cernimus,  18th  March,  1861.) 


The  Encyclical  and  Syllabus  were  felt  on  all  hands, 
have  remarked,  to  be  a  blow  struck  at  the  con- 
victions of  the  party  which  included  some  of  the  noblest 
men  in  the  Roman-catholic  church.  But  the  blow  was 
not  necessarily  a  fatal  one.  The  authority  of  the  pope 
was  acknowledged  on  all  hands,  so  that  his  utterance 
had  to  be  received  with  outward  deference.  But  so 
long  as  his  infallibility  was,  as  it  had  always  been  held 
to  be,  a  matter  of  open  question,  it  could  not  be  re- 
quired that  his  dicta  should  control  the  inward  convic- 
tion. The  lovers  of  civil  and  religious  freedom  through- 
out Roman-catholic  Christendom  bent  their  heads  in 
silence  until  this  sirocco  blast  from  the  Vatican  should 
be  overpast.  By-and-by  there  appeared,  from  the  pen 
of  one  of  the  most  vehement  but  unstable  of  the  adhe- 
rents of  the  Liberal  Catholic  party — Bishop  Dupanloup 


ENCYCLICAL   AND    SYLLABUS.  49 

of  Orleans — a  laborious  attempt  to  prove  that  the  En- 
cyclical and  Syllabus  did  not  mean  what  they  said ; 
that  they  were  aimed  not  at  liberty  but  at  license  ;  and 
that  the  errorists  condemned  in  them  were  not  the  in- 
telligent advocates  of  a  free  press,  free  schools,  and  a 
free  conscience,  but  only  the  crazy  adherents  of  lawless 
socialism.  This  interpretation  was  utterly  untenable  ; 
but  it  was  convenient ;  in  fact,  it  was  indispensable  to 
avert  from  the  head  of  the  Roman  church  the  abhor- 
rence of  free  men  and  free  nations.  Consequently,  it 
was  adopted  and  defended  by  many ;  and  in  the  Uni- 
ted States  especially,  the  Syllabus  was  promulgated 
only  under  such  glosses  and  protestations  on  the  part 
of  the  hierarchy  as  quite  turned  the  edge  of  it.  The 
Liberal  Catholic  party  began  to  pluck  up  heart  again  ; 
and  the  friends  of  absolutism  in  church  and  state  felt 
the  necessity  of  some  new  device  which  should  effec- 
tually and  finally  crush  their  antagonists  within  the 
church. 


50  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

CHAPTER  III. 
THE  PREPARATION  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

The  first  announcement  by  the  pope  of  his  intention 
to  convoke  a  general  Council  was  made  in  an  addr< 

his  to  an  assembly  of  five  hundred  bishops  at  Rome, 
June  2G,  18G7.  Twelve  months  from  that  time,  June 
29,  18G8,  the  bull  JEterni  Patria  was  published,  convo- 
king the  Council  for  the  8th  of  December,  1869. 

The  proposal  of  a  Council  was  bv  no  means  unac- 
ceptable to  the  Liberal  party.  Confident  in  the  rea- 
sonableness and  righteousness  of  their  cause,  they  wel- 
comed the  prospect  of  submitting  it  to  the  judgment, 
not  of  the  knot  of  Italians  in  the  unhappy  city  of  Borne 
that  were  the  power  behind  the  papal  throne,  but  to 
tlu1  assembly  of  bishops  from  every  country,  who,  know- 
ing from  their  practical  experience  what  are  the  diffi- 
culties which  their  church  is  subject  to  in  its  relation 
with  earnest,  devout,  and  thoughtful  men,  what  are  the 
scandals  that  bring  odium  upon  it,  what  the  almost 
universal  suspicions  of  its  hatred  to  human  liberty  and 
science,  would  be  free  to  consider  the  remedies  for 
these  things.  Thoughts  and  plans  of  reform  began  to 
take  shape  in  their  minds.*  But  they  were  not  long 
in  discovering  their  mistake. 

To  get  business  in  readiness  for  the  Council,  spe- 
cial committees  of  theologians  were  nominated  by  the 

*  See  Ce  qui  se  passe  ait,  Concile,  chap.  1.  Pastoral  of  Bp.  Du- 
panloup  of  Orleans.  (Transl.  in  Catholic  World  of  September, 
1870.)  Lord  Acton  in  North  British  Keview  of  October,  1870. 
Cardinal  Schwarzenberg's  Desideria  Patribus  Concilii  (Ecumcnici 
proponenda,  in  Documcnta  ad  Ulustrandum  Concilium,  p.  280. 


PREPARATION    OF   THE    COUNCIL.  51 

pope,  who  assembled  at  Koine  during  the  winter  of 
1868-9.  The  Liberal  party  perceived,  to  their  dismay, 
that  these  had  been  selected,  not  only  without  care  to 
represent  the  various  phases  of  opinion  within  the 
church,  but  with  an  apparent  design  to  unite  the  most 
extravagant  advocates  of  the  pope's  favorite  opinions.* 
Contrary  to  usage  and  to  fitness  in  such  cases,  the  sub- 
jects to  be  brought  before  the  body  were  kept  pro- 
foundly secret  from  those  who  were  to  be  called  to 
pronounce  upon  them. 

Besides  this  direct  preparation  for  the  Council,  a 
more  remote  preparation  had  long  been  in  progress. 
For  years,  the  question  of  the  candidate's  "  soundness" 
on  points  at  issue  between  the  parties  of  absolutism 
and  of  liberty,  had  been  considered  at  Rome,  in  the 
appointment  of  bishops ;  and  the  theological  semina- 
ries, in  which  historical  studies  had  a  strong  tendency 
to  discourage  belief  in  infallibility,  had  been  steadily 
manipulated  in  the  interest  of  absolutism. f  For  years, 
encouragement  had  been  given  to  the  holding  of  pro- 
vincial synods,  the  transactions  of  which,  in  the  first 
place,  were  managed  with  undue  influence  from  the 
representative  of  the  pope,  and  then  the  record  of  them 
having  been  garbled  by  the  expert  hands  of  papal 
politicians  at  Rome,  sent  back  to  be  published  in  the 
respective  countries  as  the  personal  work  of  the  bish- 
ops themselves.  J      Religious  associations  were  organ- 

*  Quirinus,  p.*8.     Ce  qui  se  passe  au  Conc'de,  p.  10. 

f  Catholic  World,  August,  1871,  p.  593. 

%  This  astounding  charge,  presented  by  the  author  of  Ce  qui  se 
passe  au  Conc'de,  (p.  18,)  as  "sustained  by  certain  and  authentic 
facts  in  the  history  of  the  church  of  France  of  late  years,"  is  cor- 
roborated letter  for  letter  from  the  history  of  the  Roman  church 
in  America,  by  the  personal  testimony  of  Archbishop  Kenrick, 
given  below,  p.  1^7. 


52  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

ized  under  papal  sanction  among  the  laity  of  various 
regions  to  pray  and  labor  for  the  prevalence  of  the  doc- 
trine of  the  pope's  infallibility.  By-and-by  books  in 
favor  of  this  doctrine  began  to  appear  in  regions  where 
it  had  not  obtained  currency,  and  influences  were  used 
to  draw  even  Liberal  bishops  into  good-natured  com- 
mendation of  them.*  As  the  time  of  the  Council  ap- 
proached, appliances  of  every  sort  were  multiplied  to 
manufacture  a  factitious  public  opinion  in  the  dioceses 
of  unwilling  bishops,  such  as  would  constrain  them  at 
least  to  withhold  their  opposition  from  the  designs  of 
the  absolutist  party.  The  organization  of  the  monastic 
orders,  and  especially  the  Jesuits,  afforded  unbounded 
facilities  for  this.  The  convents  and  clergy  of  each  of 
these  orders  are  not  subject  to  the  bishops  of  the  dio- 
ceses in  which  they  are  situated,  but  report  to  separate 
hierarchies  of  their  own,  each  culminating  in  a  general 
who  resides  at  Rome  and  is  under  the  immediate  orders 
of  the  pope.  Thus,  in  a  contest  in  which  the  few  re- 
maining independent  prerogatives  of  the  bishops  were 
sought  to  be  extinguished  at  last  by  the  exorbitantly 
increasing  power  of  the  pope,  the  latter  had  at  his  im- 
mediate disposal  in  every  diocese  a  force  of  "regular" 
clergy,  the  natural  rivais  and  enemies  of  episcopal 
authority  from  which  they  were  themselves  exempt,  f 

*  See  Abp.  Kenrick,  p.  140. 

f  The  author  of  Ce  qui  se  passe  au  Concile  gives,  in  long  and 
amusing  detail,  an  account  of  the  various  devices  used  to  bring 
the  Liberal  bishops  to  terms  of  submission  in  advance  of  the  Coun- 
cil. The  farewell  letter  of  Bishop  Dupanloup  to  his  clergy,  on 
setting  out  for  the  Council,  adverts  to  the  same  ■ '  effort  made  "  (by 
the  pope's  party)  "to  create  a  current  in  public  opinion  favorable 
to  their  desires,  and  to  bear  down  upon  the  assembled  bishops 
with  all  the  pressure  of  this  anticipatory  judgment.  Shall  I  go  so 
far,"  the  bishop  adds,  "as  to  mention  the  pious  artifices  resorted 
to  for  the  same  object  ?    Some  have  gone  to  the  point  of  distribu- 


PREPARATION   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  53 

When  the  time  seemed  ripe,  the  purpose  and  pro- 
gramme of  the  Council  were  announced  in  a  formal 
manifesto  in  the  acknowledged  newspaper  organ  of  the 
pope — the  CiviUa  Cattolica.  In  an  article  published 
February  6,  1869,  were  set  forth  not  only  the  points  to 
be  accomplished,  but  the  method  of  coming  at  them. 
The  doctrines  of  the  Syllabus  were  to  be  promulgated, 
the  "four  articles"  of  Gallicanism  were  to  be  anathe- 
matized, and  the  infallibility  of  the  pope  to  be  declared. 
It  was  easy  to  see  that  the  last  act,  if  performed,  would 
render  the  other  two  superfluous.  Accordingly  the 
way  of  achieving  this  is  laid  out  with  great  frankness. 
The  Council  was  to  be  very  short — six  weeks  would  be 
long  enough ;  the  minority,  however  eloquent,  should 
not  be  suffered  to  hinder  the  plan ;  it  was  hoped  that 
without  speeches  or  discussions,  under  an  immediate 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  the  Council  would  de- 
fine the  dogma  of  infallibility  by  acclamation*      The 

ting  in  the  streets— I  saw  it  myself  two  years  ago  ;  they  are  keep- 
ing it  up  to  this  day — thousands  of  little  handbills,  with  the  vow 
to  believe  in  the  personal  and  separate  infallibility  of  the  pope." 
The  letter  may  be  found  in  the  Appendix  to  vol.  2  of  the  Dis- 
courses of  Father  Hyacinthe. 

*  In  his  Pastoral  on  the  Council,  Archbishop  Manning,  with 
an  effrontery  which  is  absolutely  overwhelming  in  view  of  such  a 
document  as  that  above  cited,  treats  the  apprehension  in  the 
minds  of  the  Liberals  of  such  a  coup  cf  Hat  on  the  part  of  the  abso- 
lutists, as  mere  causeless  panic,  the  product  of  imagination.  ' '  The 
truth  is,  that  nobody,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  reaches,  and  I  believe 
I  may  speak  with  certainty,  ever  for  a  moment  dreamed  of  this  defini- 
tion by  acclamation.  All  whom  I  have  ever  heard  speak  of  these 
rumors  were  unfeignedly  amused  at  them."  One  is  bewildered  in 
the  attempt  to  answer  this  language  of  Archbishop  Manning  ;  for 
the  very  documents  which  he  quotes  in  this  Pastoral  show  him  to 
have  been  acquainted  with  the  facts  of  which  he  denies  the  exist- 
ence. See  Petri  Privilegium,  3.  37  ;  "Janus,"  p.  5  ;  Ce  qui  se  passe 
au  Concile,  pp.  25-29  ;  Lord  Acton  in  North  British  Review,  Octo- 
ber, 1870. 


54  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

suggestion  was  simultaneously  reduplicated,  as  if  by 

preconcert,  by  Bishop  Plantier  of  Nimes,  in  an  official 
charge,  as  big  as  a  book,  on  General  Councils. 

Everything  seemed  to  favor  the  designs  of  the  abso- 
lutists. The  press  seemed  to  be  occupied  with  utter- 
ing their  manifestoes,  and  to  have  no  voice  for  the  other 
side.  One  ponderous  pastoral  after  another  rolled 
forth  from  such  prelates  as  Manning  of  Westminster 
and  Dechamps  of  Malines,  in  commendation  of  the  pro- 
posed dogma  of  infallibility,  as  being  the  universally 
accepted  dogma  of  the  Roman-catholic  church,  and 
men  began  to  wonder  whether  the  other  side  was  to 
have  a  hearing  at  all.  So  ill  were  the  Liberal  party 
prepared  tor  the  debate,  that  it  was  not  till  June,  1870, 
that  the  first  demonstration  was  made  in  their  behalf 
The  first  official  word  spoken  by  any  bishop  against  the 
proposed  dogma  was  in  the  letters  of  Dupanloup  of 
Orleans,  less  than  a  month  before  the  opening  of  the 
Council.* 

Ale  an  while,  a  book  which  will  be  memorable  in  the 
history  of  literature,  as  one  of  the  most  crushing  blows 
ever  struck  in  any  controversy,  had  come  forth,  in 
August,  from  a  Catholic  university  in  Germany,  entitled 
"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  by  Janus."  It  is  the  work 
of  more  than  one  learned  theologian  of  the  Roman- 
catholic  church,  and  deals  with  the  question  of  infalli- 
bility from  the  root.  It  shows  that  the  theological 
opinion  in  favor  of  papal  infallibility,  as  it  has  been 
held  by  many  in  other  ages,  was  the  offspring  of  sheer 
imposture  and  wholesale  forgery,  sustained  and  repeat- 
ed from  generation  to  generation  ;  and  that  many  other 
of  the  claims  of  the  papacy  rest  on  like  foundation.    It 

*  The  chronology  of  this  discussion  is  given  in  Ce  qui  se  passe 
au  Coyicile,  pp.  28-38. 


PREPARATION  OF  THE    COUNCIL.  55 

touches  on  the  cases  of  alleged  heresy  and  mutual  con- 
tradiction on  the  part  of  certain  popes.  And  finally,  it 
exhibits  the  character  of  some  of  the  former  papal  de- 
crees, which  the  retrospective  force  of  the  new  dogma 
would  certify  to  be  infallible — too  insulting  to  the  in- 
telligence of  the  present  day  to  be  tolerated  by  any 
thinking  man — and  warns  the  bishops  what  are  the 
consequences  of  the  act  to  which  they  are  urged.  The 
warning  has  been  disregarded,  and  the  little  book  of 
Janus  needs  only  to  be  translated  into  another  mood 
and  tense,  to  be  the  most  convenient  manual  extant  of 
the  present  tenets  now  professed  as  infallible  by  the 
church  of  Borne.* 

After  the  arrival  of  the  bishops  at  Rome,  further 
preparatory  discussion  in  print  was  interdicted  by  the 
pope,  just  as  the  bishop  of  Orleans  was  about  to  pub- 
lish a  reply  to  the  ultramontanes.  The  interdict  held 
good  against  the  minority  till  the  close  of  the  Council ; 
but  it  was  not  found  difficult  for  the  partisans  of  infal- 
libility to  get  permission  to  print,  on  their  side,  what- 
ever might  seem  conducive  to  the  success  of  their  plans,  f 

*  The  authorized  English  translation  of  Janus  (a  beautiful 
specimen  of  clear,  neat,  idiomatic  translation  into  English)  is  pub- 
lished in  America  by  Roberts  Brothers,  Boston.  Dr.  Hergenrotker 
in  his  book  called  Anti-Janus,  (Catholic  Publication  Society,  New 
York,)  attempts  to  answer  Janus  in  detail ;  but  does  not  apprecia- 
bly weaken  the  tremendous  force  of  his  main  arguments.  Dr. 
Manning  has  hit  upon  the  only  really  effective  way  of  answering 
Janus,  in  his  fine  argument,  that  if  historical  facts  are  opposed  to 
a  dogma,  it  is  all  the  worse  for  the  facts.  "The  true  and  conclu- 
sive answer  to  this  objection  consists  ....  in  a  principle  of  faith  ; 
namely,  that  whensoever  any  doctrine  is  contained  in  the  divine 
tradition  of  the  church,  all  difficulties  are  excluded  by  prescrip- 
tion."   Petri  PrivUegium,  3.  119. 

+  Ce  qui  se  passe  au  Concile,  p.  38.  This  statement,  which 
seemed  one  of  the  hardest  to  believe  against  the  pope  and  his 
party,  is  incidentally  confirmed  by  Archbishop  Kenrick,  p.   109. 


5G  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

But  though  the  bishops  were  silenced,  except  so  far 
as  they  would  consent  to  speak  on  the  pope's  side,  other 
voices  continued  to  be  heard  in  behalf  of  history  mis- 
represented and  society  imperilled.  The  most  notable 
and  effective  pamphlets  issued,  perhaps,  were  those  of 
the  learned  and  courageous  Father  Gratry.  His  four 
letters  to  the  archbishop  of  Malinefl  were  an  unrefuted 
and  irrefutable  exposition  not  only  of  the  fact  that  Pope 
Honorius  was  condemned  and  anathematized  as  a  her- 
etic by  the  Sixth  General  Council,  but  also  of  the  long 
succession  of  frauds  and  forgeries  by  which  the  author- 
ities of  the  church  of  Rome  had  sought  to  suppress 
this  fact  from  the  knowledge  of  its  devotees.* 

But  the  progress  of  events  was  not,  on  the  whole, 
such  as  to  encourage  the  hope  of  a  free  Council.  The 
undisguised  intervention  of  the  pope  himself,  with  the 
use  of  every  kind  of  influence,  official  and  personal,  to 
secure  the  adoption  of  the  proposed  dogma,  and  the 
arrogance  of  the  party  of  his  adherents,  increased 
daily  as  the  time  for  opening  the  Council  drew  near. 
This  party  was  emboldened,  at  last,  to  strike  at  the 
foremost  figure  in  the  Roman-catholic  pulpit — long  the 
object  of  its  special  hatred.  The  matchless  eloquence 
of  Father  Hyacinthe,  his  illustrious  services  to  the 
church  of  Rome,  his  devotion  to  the  pope  as  the  spirit- 
ual head  of  the  church,  the  ascetic  purity  of  his  life,  his 
faith  and  piety,  were  all  of  no  account,  in. view  of  the  one 
crime  of  his  devotion  to  liberty  and  human  rights.  The 
influence  of  "  the  party  omnipotent  at  Rome  "  secured, 
from  the  head  of  his  monastic  order,  a  letter  of  rebuke 
and  instruction,  which  was  equivalent,  for  any  honest 

*  The  Letters  of  Father  Gratry  are  published  in  an  English 
translation,  in  pamphlet,  by  Pott,  Young  &  Co.,  New  York.  They 
constitute  a  document  of  permanent  value. 


PREPAUATION  OF  THE    COUNCIL.  57 

preacher,  to  an  interdict  from  further  preaching.  The 
protest  uttered  by  him  in  reply  signalized  and  intensi- 
fied the  feelings  of  the  two  parties  whose  final  conflict 
was  impending. 

THE  PEOTEST  OF  FATHEPv  HYACINTHE. 

To  the  Reverend,  the  General,  of  the  Order  of  Barefooted 

Carmelites,  Home  : 

Very  Reverend  Father  :  During  the  five  years  of 
my  ministry  at  Notre  Dame,  Paris,  notwithstanding 
the  open  attacks  and  secret  misrepresentations  of  which 
I  have  been  the  object,  your  confidence  and  esteem 
have  never  for  a  moment  failed  me.  I  retain  numerous 
testimonials  of  this  in  your  handwriting,  which  relate 
as  well  to  my  preaching  as  to  myself.  "Whatever  may 
occur,  I  shall  hold  this  in  grateful  remembrance. 

To-day,  however,  by  a  sudden  shift,  the  cause  of 
which  I  look  for  not  in  your  heart,  but  in  the  intrigues 
of  a  party  omnipotent  at  Rome,  you  find  fault  with 
what  you  have  encouraged,  blame  what  you  have  ap- 
proved, and  demand  that  I  shall  use  such  language  or 
keep  such  a  silence  as  would  no  longer  be  the  entire  and 
loyal  expression  of  my  conscience. 

I  do  not  hesitate  a  moment.  With  speech  falsified 
by  an  order  from  my  superior,  or  mutilated  by  enforced 
reticences,  I  would  not  again  enter  the  pulpit  of  Notre 
Dame.  I  express  my  regret  for  this  to  the  brave  and 
intelligent  bishop*  who  placed  me  and  has  maintained 
me  in  it  against  the  ill-will  of  the  men  of  whom  I  have 
just  been  speaking.  I  express  my  regrets  for  it  to  the 
imposing  audience  which  there  surrounded  me  with  its 
attention,  its  sympathies — I  had  almost  said,  its  friend- 
ship.    I  should  be  worthy  neither  of  the  audience,  nor* 

*  Archbishop  Darboy  of  Paris. 
3* 


58  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

of  the  bishop,  nor  of  my  conscience,  nor  of  God,  if  I 
could  consent  to  play  such  a  part  in  their  presence. 

At  the  same  time,  I  withdraw  from  the  convent  in 
which  I  dwell,  and  which,  in  the  new  circumstances 
which  have  befallen  me,  has  become  a  prison  to  my 
soul.  In  acting  thus,  I  am  not  unfaithful  to  my  vows. 
I  have  promised  monastic  obedience — but  within  the 
limits  of  an  honest  conscience,  and  of  the  dignify  of 
my  person  and  ministry.  I  have  promised  it  under 
favor  of  that  higher  law  of  justice,  the  "royal  law  of 
liberty,"  which  is,  according  to  the  apostle  James,  the 
proper  law  of  the  Christian. 

It  was  the  most  untrammelled  enjoyment  of  this 
holy  liberty  that  I  came  to  seek  in  the  cloister,  now 
more  than  ten  years  ago,  under  the  impulse  of  an  en- 
thusiasm pure  from  all  worldly  calculation — I  dare  not 
add,  free  from  all  youthful  illusion.  If,  in  return  for 
my  sacrifices,  I  now  am  offered  chains,  it  is  not  merely 
my  right  to  reject  them,  it  is  my  duty. 

This  is  a  solemn  hour.  The  church  is  passing 
through  one  of  the  most  violent  crises — one  of  the 
darkest  and  most  decisive — of  its  earthly  existence. 
For  the  first  time  in  three  hundred  years,  an  (Ecumen- 
ical Council  is  not  only  summoned,  but  declared  "ne- 
cessary." It  is  the  word  used  by  the  holy  father.  Not 
at  such  a  moment  can  a  preacher  of  the  gospel,  were 
he  the  least  of  all,  consent  to  hold  his  peace  like  the 
"dumb  dogs"  of.  Israel — treacherous  guardians,  whom 
the  prophet  rebukes  because  they  could  not  bark. 

The  saints  are  never  dumb.  I  am  not  one  of  them  ; 
but  yet  I  know  that  I  am  come  of  that  stock— -fit it  sanc- 
torum sujnus — and  it  has  ever  been  my  ambition  to 
"place  my  steps,  my  tears,  and,  if  need  were,  my  blood 
in  the  track  of  theirs. 


PREPARATION    OF   THE    COUNCIL.  59 

I  lift  up,  then,  before  the  holy  father  and  before 
the  Council,  my  protest  as  a  Christian  and  a  priest 
against  those  doctrines  and  practices  which  call  them- 
selves Roman  but  are  not  Christian,  and  which,  making 
encroachments  ever  bolder  and  deadlier,  tend  to  change 
the  constitution  of  the  church,  the  substance  as  well 
as  the  form  of  its  teaching,  and  even  the  spirit  of  its 
piety.  I  protest  against  the  divorce,  as  impious  as  it 
is  mad,  which  men  are  struggling  to  accomplish  be- 
tween the  church,  which  is  our  mother  for  eternity,  and 
the  society  of  the  nineteenth  century,  whose  sons  we 
are  for  time,  and  toward  which  we  have  both  duties 
and  affections. 

I  protest  against  that  opposition,  more  radical  and 
frightful  yet,  which  arrays  itself  against  human  nature, 
attacked  and  revolted  by  these  false  teachers  in  its 
most  indestructible  and  holiest  aspirations.  I  pro- 
test, above  all,  against  the  sacrilegious  perversion  of 
the  gospel  of  the  Son  of  God  himself,  the  spirit  and 
the  letter  of  which  are  alike  trodden  under  foot  by  the 
Pharisaism  of  the  new  law. 

It  is  my  most  profound  conviction  that  if  France  in 
particular,  and  the  Latin  races  in  general,  are  delivered 
over  to  anarchy,  social,  moral,  and  religious,  the  prin- 
cipal cause  of  it  is  to  be  found,  not  certainly  in  Cathol- 
icism itself,  but  in  the  way  in  which  Catholicism  has 
for  a  long  time  been  understood  and  practised. 

I  appeal  to  the  Council  now  about  to  assemble,  to 
seek  remedies  for  our  excessive  evils,  and  to  apply  them 
at  once  with  energy  and  with  gentleness.  But  if  fears 
which  I  am  loath  to  share  should  come  to  be  realized — 
if  that  august  assembly  should  have  no  more  liberty  in 
its  deliberations  than  it  now  has  in  its  preparation — if, 
in  a  word,  it  should  be  robbed  of  the  characteristics 


GO  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

essential  to  an  (Ecumenical  Council,  I  would  cry  out  to 
God  and  man  to  demand  another  that  should  be  truly 
"assembled  in  the  Holy  Spirit,"  and  not  in  party  spir- 
it— that  should  truly  represent  the  universal  church, 
and  not  the  silence  of  some  and  the  constraint  of 
others.  "  For  the  hurt  of  the  daughter  of  my  people 
am  I  hurt ;  I  am  black  ;  astonishment  hath  taken  hold 
on  me.  Is  there  no  balm  in  Gilead  ?  is  there  no  phy- 
sician there  ?  why  then  is  not  the  health  of  the  daugh- 
ter of  my  people  recovered?"     Jer.  8  :  21,  22. 

Finally,  I  appeal,  Lord  Jesus,  to  thy  bar.  Ad  tuum, 
Domine  Jesut  tribunal  appeUo.  In  thy  presence  I  write 
these  lines.  At  thy  feet,  having  much  prayed,  much 
pondered,  much  Buffered,  and  waited  long — at  thy  feet 
I  subscribe  tin  in.  And  I  have  this  trust  concerning 
them,  that,  however  men  may  condemn  them  upon 
earth,  thou  wilt  approve  them  in  heaven.  Living  or 
dying,  this  is  enough  for  me. 

BROTHER  HYACINTHE, 
Superior  of  the  Barefooted  Carmelites  of  Paris, 

Second  Definitor  of  the  Order  in  the  province  of  Avignon 

Pabis— Passy,  September  20,  1869. 


COMPOSITION   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  61 

CHAPTER   IV. 

THE  COMPOSITION  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

It  is  a  very  striking  remark  of  Archbishop  Kenrick,* 
that  the  church,  which  was  of  old  the  model  of  repre  - 
sentative  government  to  which  civil  society  is  indebted 
for  its  rights  and  liberties,  is  transformed,  by  the  ultra- 
montane theories,  to  the  most  complete  type  of  an 
absolute  despotism. 

In  the  earlier  councils,  the  bishops  were  the  elective 
officers  of  the  local  churches  which  they  represented. 
In  later  ages,  when  the  liberties  of  the  local  and  na- 
tional churches  were  in  danger  of  being  lost  in  the 
encroachment  of  the  Roman  see,  they  were  taken  under 
the  protection  of  the  several  civil  governments.  It  was 
an  unhappy  relation  for  the  state  to  hold  towards  reli- 
gion ;  but  it  had,  nevertheless,  this  advantage,  that  it 
secured  a  certain  measure  of  independence  to  these 
churches  and  their  bishops,  and  so  gave  a  correspond- 
ing measure  of  authority  to  their  acts  when  assembled 

*  Infra,  p.  121,  note. 

The  same  double  antithesis  has  been  stated  by  other  writers. 
That  impressive  little  pamphlet,  La  Dernihe  Ileure  du  Concile, 
(said  by  Quirinus  to  be  by  an  eminent  member  of  the  Council,) 
puts  it  thus:  "The  church  which  once  furnished  to  civil  society 
the  model  of  a  monarchy  in  which  the  aristocratic  and  popular  ele- 
ment effectively  tempered  the  excesses  of  the  supreme  power — the 
church  which  was  the  first  to  present  to  the  modern  world  the 
example  of  great  assemblies  discussing  in  freedom  the  rights  of 
truth  and  justice— is  now  presenting  the  spectacle  of  a  Council 
without  liberty,  and  the  menace  of  an  absolutism  without  limit," 
p.  15. 


62  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

in  council.  If  the  bishops  assembled  at  Trent  had 
been  the  mere  appointees  of  the  pope,  removable  at 
his  nod,  representing  the  choice  neither  of  the  clergy, 
nor  of  the  people  and  rulers  of  the  different  countries 
of  Christendom,  there  would  have  been,  doubtl* 
much  greater  unanimity  in  that  Council,  and  it  would 
have  reached  its  conclusions  without  protracted  debate  ; 
but  the  conclusions,  when  readied,  would  have  had 
exactly  the  value,  and  no  more,  of  a  decree  of  the  mas- 
ter who  created  and  convoked  it. 

By  the  silent  revolution  alluded  to  by  the  arch- 
bishop of  St.  Louis,  the  Roman-catholic  church  had 
been  transformed,  in  the  three  hundred  years  between 
the  Council  of  Trent  and  the  Council  of  the  Vatican,  to 
just,  such  an  organization  as  we  have  described.  A 
scanty  minority  only  represented  the  poor  remains  of 
the  early  autonomy  of  the  churches. 

According  to  an  official  statement  published  at 
Rome,  the  number  of  the  fathers  then*  sitting  at  the 
Vatican  with  a  voice  in  the  deliberations  was  759,  seven 
having  died  and  four  received  leave  of  absence  since 
the  Council  opened.  Out  of  these  759  prelates  there 
are  reckoned  in  round  numbers  : 

'50  cardinals  ; 

100  vicars-apostolic  "revocable  ad  mitum;" 

50  generals  of  orders  and  mitred  abbots  ; 

*  The  statement  was  published  some  weeks  after  the  opening 
of  the  Council.  The  above  analysis  of  the  composition  of  the 
Council  is  taken  from  Ce  qui  se  pas.se  au  Concile,  pp.  41  18.  Like 
many  of  the  most  damaging  revelations  and  arguments  of  that 
book,  it  is  too  well  attested  to  be  weakened  by  the  violent  denun- 
ciations of  the  majority  of  the  Council.  On  the  contrary,  the 
proved  accuracv  of  the  book,  wherever  we  are  able  to  test  it,  gives 
us  reason  to  believe  that  its  statements  concerning  the  secret  trans- 
actions of  the  Council  are  true,  aid  the  passionate  contradictions 
of  them  false. 


COMPOSITION    OF    THE    COUNCIL.  63 

100  and  more  bishops  of  the  Propaganda  ; 

276  Italians,  143  of  whom  belonged  to  the  Papal 
states.* 

Outside  of  this  enormous  majority  of  580  out  of 
759  votes  evidently  secured  for  the  Vatican,  only  180 
bishops  could  be  found  whose  churches  still  retained 
till  lately  some  measure  of  autonomy.  These  are  the 
Germans,  the  French,  the  Spanish,  the  Portuguese, 
and  those  Orientals  who  are  not  of  the  Latin  rite. 

To  appreciate  the  full  bearing  of  these  figures,  it 
must  be  remarked : 

1.  That  the  number  of  vicars-apostolic  and  func- 
tionaries of  the  Roman  curia  (bishops  in  partibusff) 
was  never  so  large  in  any  former  Council ;  and  yet  pro- 
tests of  the  most  earnest  character  were  repeatedly 
made  against  their  presence,  especially  at  Trent  and 
Constance. 

2.  That  the  Propaganda,  the  discipline  of  which  is 
like  that  of  an  army  in  the  field,  was  founded  by  Greg- 
ory XIII.,  in  1585,  and  is  consequently  later  than  the 
Council  of  Trent.  It  includes  the  episcopates  of  Eng- 
land, Holland,  the  United  States,  and  various  other 
countries. 

3.  That  in  consequence  of  revolutions,  episcopates 
once  regularly  organized  in  such  a  way  as  to  possess 
some  independence,  find  themselves  at  present  without 
resources,  persecuted  by  their  governments,  and  com- 

*  That  is,  according  to  the  former  boundaries,  which  included 
2,600,000  souls.  The  states  of  the  church  at  the  opening  of  the 
Council  included  only  G72,000  souls. 

f  Bishops  by  brevet,  having  no  dioceses  or  churches.  When 
for  any  reason  it  seems  desirable  to  the  court  of  Rome  to  raise  any 
person  to  the  rank  of  bishop,  without  putting  him  into  an  actual 
see,  he  is  appointed  nominally  to  some  extinct  church  in  partilms 
injidelium,  that  is,  in  regions  now  occupied  by  heathen. 


64  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

pletely  given  up  to  the  discretion  of  the  court  of  Rome, 
which  is  their  only  reliance.  Such  is  the  condition  of 
the  bishops  of  South  America  since  the  revolutions  of 
the  last  twenty  years,  of  the  Italian  bishops  since  1861, 
and  the  Spanish  since  1869. 

4.  That  formerly  the  immense  majority  of  the  bish- 
ops held  their  sees  by  the  concurrence  of  the  civil  and 
spiritual  powers,  which  explains  the  jealous  care  with 
which,  in  the  deliberations  of  Councils,  they  stood  out 
for  national  independence  and  the  peculiar  traditions 
of  their  several  churches.  At  present,  out  of  eleven 
hundred  episcopal  titles  in  existence*  there  are  scarcely 
two  hundred  in  the  conferment  of  which  the  Catholic 
nations  retain  any  right  whatever  of  interfering,  wheth- 
er through  the  prince,  or  through  the  chapters  of  cathe- 
drals, or  through  the  suffragans  or  the  metropolitan. 
Nine  hundred  are  absolutely  at  the  disposition  of  the  pope 
alone  The  efforts  are  notorious  which  the  Roman  curia 
has  put  forth  to  annihilate  the  last  privileges  still  re- 
tained by  France  and  the  East. 

5.  That  out  of  180,000,000  of  Catholics  in  the  world, 
France,  Germany,  and  Portugal  reckon  83,000,000 — 
that  is,  nearly  one  half ;  while,  out  of  the  770  prelates 
coming  to  the  Council,  these  three  nations— -the  last 
who  retain  anything  of  their  religious  independence — 
are  represented  by  only  156  bishops,  or  scarcely  more 
than  one-fifth  of  that  assembly. 

As  we  have  just  seen,  Italy,  with  the  Papal  states, 
the  population  of  which  hardly  reaches  25,000,000  of 
Catholics,  has  276  bishops  in  the  Council. 

The  States  of  the  Church,  which  included,  even  with- 
in their  earlier  frontiers,  only  2,600,000  souls,  have  143 
bishops,  or  nearly  thirty  times  more,  in  proportion, 
*  Only  981  sees  nre  filled. 


COMPOSITION   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  65 

than  France,  Germany,  and  Portugal.  And  if  we  con- 
sider that  the  greater  part  of  the  bishops  belonging  to 
the  annexed  provinces  remained  at  Rome  in  absolute 
dependence  on  the  Holy  See,  it  brings  us  to  the  enor- 
mous proportion  of  one  hundred  and  ten  to  one. 

6.  That  more  than  one-half  of  the  prelates  assem- 
bled at  the  Vatican  were  lodged  and  entertained,  with 
their  suites,  at  the  pope's  own  expense. 

"With  these  materials,  it  might  have  seemed  that 
the  party  of  absolutism  were  sufficiently  secure  of  "  a 
good  working  majority,"  to  leave  the  Council  free  to 
conduct  its  own  business.  But  the  papal  court  did  not 
so  judge. 


G(J  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

CHAPTER  V. 
THE  CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

Among  the  conservative  traditions  of  the  canon  law- 
are  these  two:  first,  that  while  a  majority  vote  may 
suffice,  in  council,  to  enact  decrees  of  discipline,  which 
bind  only  the  outward  conduct,  and  are  repealable, 

"moral  unanimity"  is  necessary  to  the  definition  of 
articles  of  faith,  which  are  irrepealable  and  bind  the 
soul  and  conscience  to  an  inward  assent,  under  pain  of 
everlasting  damnation;  secondly,  thai  freedom  of  de- 
liberation and  action  are  necessary  to  the  "oBCUmeni- 
city"  and  authority  of  a  General  Council. 

The  dilemma  of  the  Absolutist  party  was  this  : 
Either  they  must  concede  liberty  to  the  Council,  in 
which  case  free  discussion  and  a  free  vote  would  result 
in  a  manifest  diversity  of  sentiment  on  the  main  ques- 
tion;  or  they  must  secure  an  apparent  unanimity  by 
the  sacrifice  of  conciliar  liberty.  The  choice  bet 
liberty  and  unanimity  was  a  perilous  one  to  then*  plans  ; 
but  it  was  boldly  made.  They  decided  to  sacrifice  lib- 
erty for  the  sake  of  unanimity — and  failed  of  both. 

We  have  seen  that  the  preliminary  discussion  of  the 
matter  to  be  submitted  to  the  Council  was  prevented 
by  the  secrecy  in  which  this  matter  had  been  prepared 
by  committees  of  theologians  appointed  by  the  pope 
with  reference  to  their  partisan  views.  Arrived  at 
Rome,  the  bishops  found  themselves  bound  under  in- 
junctions of  secrecy,  forbidden  to  communicate  with 
each  other  in  print,  and  forbidden  to  hold  meetings  of 
those  of  the  same  language,  for  conference. 


CONSTITUTION   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  G7 

At  the  first  meeting  of  the  Council,  the  rules  of  the 
Council  were  announced  in  the  bull  MultipUces  inter. 
In  this,  "the  pope*  assumed  to  himself  the  sole  initia- 
tive in  proposing  topics,  and  the  exclusive  nomination 
of  the  officers  of  the  Council.  He  invited  the  bishoi)s 
to  bring  forward  their  own  proposals,  but  required  that 
they  should  submit  them  first  of  all  to  a  commission 
which  was  appointed  by  himself,  and  consisted  half  of 
Italians.  If  any  proposal  was  allowed  to  pass  by  this 
commission,  it  had  still,  to  obtain  the  sanction  of  the 
pope,  who  could  therefore  exclude  at  will  any  topic, 
even  if  the  whole  Council  wished  to  discuss  it.  Four 
elective  commissions  were  to  mediate  between  the 
Council  and  the  pope.  When  a  decree  had  been  dis- 
cussed and  opposed,  it  was  to  be  referred,  together 
with  the  amendments,  to  one  of  these  commissions, 
where  it  was  to  be  reconsidered  with  the  aid  of  divines. 
What  the  Council  discussed  was  to  be  the  work  of 
unknown  divines  ;  what  it  voted  was  to  be  the  work  of 
a  majority  in  a  commission  of  twenty-four.  ...  It  was 
further  provided  that  the  reports  of  the  speeches  should 
not  be  communicated  to  the  bishops  ;  and  the  strictest 
secrecy  was  enjoined  on  all. 

The  means  of  information  allowed  to  the  bishops 
on  the  business  on  which  they  were  to  act,  were  confined 
to  the  personal  study  which  they  were  able  to  give  to 
the  schema  during  the  several  days — from  four  to  eight 
days  generally,  but  sometimes  less — between  the  distri- 
bution of  the  papers  and  the  discussion. 

Anything  like  debate  was  precluded.  Off-hand 
remark  was  out  of  order.  The  speakers  must  give  no- 
tice in  advance  of  their  wish  to  be  heard,  previous  to 

*  We  take  this  summary  of  the  bull  from  that  eminent  Catho- 
lic, Lord  Acton's,  article  on  the  Council,  ubi  supra. 


G8  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

the  day  of  the  session.  They  must  speak  in  order  of 
their  rank,  without  reference  to  the  relevancy  of  any 
speaker's  remarks  to  those  of  his  predecessors.  No 
reply  was  permitted. 

The  hall  of  the  Council  was  so  constructed — pur- 
posely, as  many  believed* — as  to  make  it  almost  im- 
possible for  speakers  to  be  heard.  The  use  of  a  dead 
language,  which  few  of  the  members  could  readily  use 
or  understand,  aggravated  this  difficulty. 

The  difficulty  might  have  been  relieved  by  allowing 
the  reports  of  the  proceedings  to  be  printed  and  sub- 
mitted to  the  members  ;  but  this,  too,  was  not  allowed. 
Stenographic  reports  were  made  by  official  stenograph- 
ers, to  be  locked  up  with  the  secret  archives  of  the 
Council.  Something  might  have  been  done  by  means 
of  printed  discussion,  or  by  allowing  the  speakers  to 
print  their  speeches  at  their  own  expense.  But  this, 
too,  was  forbidden,  f  In  short,  the  members  of  the 
Council  were  "forbidden  to  hear,  forbidden  to  read, 
forbidden  to  answer.  "J 

Obviously,  the  only  place  where  the  Council  could 
have  any  opportunity  of  taking  part  in  the  shaping  of 
its  own  business  was  in  the  committees  of  revision,  to 
which  schemata  that  should  be  objected  to  at  their  first 
introduction  were  to  be  referred  for  amendment.  If 
these  could  be  properly  constituted,  by  a  free  vote,  in 
such  a  way  as  to  represent  the  various  parties  in  the 
Council,  the  acts  of  the  Council  might  be  framed  to 
express  its  views  ;  otherwise,  not. 

The  pages  of   "Quirinus"  and  Ce  qui  se  2^asse  an 

*  One  of  the  Roman  courtiers  confessed  this.  Quirinus,  p.  144. 

t  Ce  qui  se  passe  au  Concile,  pp.  59 -Gl.  All  these  statements 
are  amply  fortified  by  references. 

|  Ibidem,  p.  62.  One  of  the  bishops  declared  the  Council  to 
have  been  made  deaf,  dumb,  and  blind. 


CONSTITUTION   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  69 

Concile  charge  that  the  appointment  of  these  commit- 
tees was  carried  by  devices  familiar  to  the  less  repu- 
table forms  of  politics.  But  the  charge  had  been 
thrown  into  suspicion,  by  a  sweeping  denunciation  of 
falsehood  against  these  volumes.  The  testimony  of 
Archbishop  Kenrick  shows  that  their  gravest  allega- 
tions are  true,  and  that  the  only  one  of  these  commit- 
tees that  reported  any  business,  was  unscrupulously 
packed  with  partisans  of  infallibility.* 

It  might  surely  have  seemed  now  that  the  Council 
was  sufficiently  tied  up  by  restrictions  to  be  secure 
against  doing  any  harm  to  the  plans  of  its  managers. 
But  they  were  so  far  from  being  satisfied  of  this,  that 
on  the  22d  of  February,  1870,  after  the  Council  had 
been  for  more  than  two  months  in  session,  a  new  code 
of  fourteen  rules  was  imposed  upon  it  by  a  papal  de- 
cree.    Four  of  these  rules  are  worthy  of  note  : 

1.  Originally,  the  bills,  or  schemata,  reported  by  the 
preparatory  commissions,  were  liable  to  be  discussed 
in  the  Council  before  being  referred  to  the  Committee 
of  the  Council  for  amendment.  Under  the  new  regola- 
menio,  all  bills  were  to  be  referred  without  debate,  and 
instead  of  speaking  thereupon,  the  bishops  were  at 
liberty  to  send  their  observations  upon  the  bill  in  wri- 
ting to  the  committee,  who  would  make  a  synopsis  of 
the  various  observations,  at  their  discretion,  and  sub- 
mit it  in  print  to  the  members  of  the  Council. 

2  By  Article  X.  of  the  new  code  it  was  provided 
that  any  speaker  might  be  called  to  order  by  the  papal 
legates  for  wandering  from  the  question,  and  at  their 
discretion  might  be  refused  liberty  to  proceed.  Of 
course,  no  appeal  from  the  decision  of  the  chair  was 
allowed. 

*  Sec  infra,  p.  171. 


70  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

3.  By  Article  XL,  the  "previous  question"  might 
be  ordered  by  a  sheer  majority,  and  all  debate  cut  off. 

4.  But  the  most  important  of  these  new  rules  was 
that  which,  in  defiance  of  all  the  precedents  of  ecclesi- 
astical history,  set  aside  the  principle  thai  decrees  of 
faith  could  be  enacted  only  by  the  "moral  unanimity'' 
of  the  bishops,  and  provided  that  -"  id  decernetur  quod 
majoripatrum  numero placuerit" — i.  e.,  any  decree  might 
be  carried  by  a  mere  numerical  majority. 

When  the  edict  imposing  these  new  rules  was  rend, 
it  was  felt  on  all  hands  that  farther  opposition  to  the 
plans  of  the  Absolutist  party  was  desperate.  "The 
majority  was  omnipotent."* 

The  minority  could  only  protest  ;  and  this  they  did 
in  a  very  humble  address  to  the  pope's  legates,  which 
concluded  thus  : 

"As  to  the  provisions  concerning  the  number  of 
votes  requisite  to  the  settlement  of  epiestions  of  dogma, 
which  in  fact  is  the  main  point,  and  that  on  which  the 
whole  Council  hinges,  it  is  a  matter  of  such  grave 
importance,  that  unless  our  reverent  and  most  earnest 
petition  should  be  granted,  the  burden  on  our  con- 
sciences would  be  unendurable.  "We  should  be  afraid 
that  the  character  of  this  body  as  an  (Ecumenical 
Council  would  be  called  in  question,  and  a  handle 
given  to  our  enemies  for  attacking  the  holy  see  and 
the  Council,  and  that  thus  in  the  end  the  authority  of 
this  Council  w^ould  be  impaired  with  the  Christian  pub- 
lic, as  'wanting  in  truth  and  liberty' — a  calamity  so 
direful,  in  these  uneasy  times,  that  a  greater  could  not 
be  imagined. "f 

*  Lord  Acton's  Article. 

f  Cited  in  the  original  by  Quirmus.  pp.  327-330.  The  entire 
Protest  is  (riven  in  the  Docum^ntn  'id  iUustrandum  OoncUuan. 


.    PROCEEDINGS  OF    THE   COUNCIL.  71 

CHAPTER  VI, 
THE  PROCEEDINGS  OF  THE   COUNCIL. 

The  Council  was  opened  with  great  pomp  on  the 
8th  of  December,  1869. 

A  fortnight  later,*  the  first  part  of  a  voluminous 
draft  of  a  decree  was  distributed,  under  the  injunction 
of  secrecy,  and  on  the  28th  of  December  the  debate  on 
it  began.  From  the  beginning,  it  seems  to  have  been 
admitted  that  the  strength  of  the  argument  was  with 
the  minority.  The  "schema"  or  draft  was  at  once 
severely  handled ;  Archbishop  Conolly  of  Halifax  rec- 
ommended that  it  should  be  "  decently  buried. "f  But 
the -foremost  figure  in  this  and  in  all  the  subsequent 
debates  was  a  bishop  from  the  remote  province  of  Cro- 
atia, on  the  frontier  of  Turkey,  whose  name,  Stross- 
mayer,  soon  became  famous  throughout  the  civilized 

*  In  this  very  brief  chronicle  of  the  transactions  of  the  Coun- 
cil, which  is  intended  only  us  a  setting  for  the  documents  here 
r  jsented,  many  matters  of  importance  to  the  history  are  necessa- 
rily omitted.  At  this  point  the  promulgation,  just  after  the  open- 
ing of  the  Council,  of  the  significant  bull  "  Apostolicce  Sedis,"  in 
which  many  of  the  most  offensive  claims  of  the  papacy,  such  as 
its  American  apologists  have  been  accustomed  to  repudiate  or  dis- 
avow, shoiild,  in  a  full  history  of  the  Council,  have  been  recorded 
at  large.  Those  who  would  inform  themselves  more  fully  on  the 
events  here  briefly  mentioned,  are  referred  to  the  notable  Article 
by  the  Catholic  Lord  Acton,  in  the  North  British  Review,  October, 
1870,  (the  best  of  the  brief  accounts  of  the  Council,  from  one 
whose  opportunities  of  information  were  the  best  possible  to  an 
outsider,  and  all  whose  important  statements  of  fact  are  confirmed 
by  unimpeachable  documents,)  and  to  the  more  voluminous  Let- 
ters of  Quirinus. 

f  "  Ctnseo  Sdiema  cum  honore  esse  sepdiendum." 


72  THE   VATTCAN   COUNCIL. 

world  for  the  vehemence  and  copiousness  of  his  Latin 
eloquence,  which  could  neither  be  repressed  by  the 
rigor  of  the  cardinal-presidents,  nor  made  wholly  inau- 
dible by  the  excessively  poor  acoustic  properties  of 
the  Council-chamber,  nor  shut  from  the  world  by  the 
injunctions  of  secrecy.  On  the  30th  of  December  he 
inveighed  in  the  following  terms  against  the  Schema, 
as  being  a  brutum  fuhnen  against  errors  long  ago  con- 
demned, and  not  likely  to  be  extinguished  by  new 
edicts  : 

"  Of  what  use  is  it  to  condemn  what  has  been  con- 
demned already?  "What  satisfaction  can  we  take  in 
proscribing  errors  which  we  all  know  to  have  been  pro- 
scribed beforehand?  ....  I  admit  that  the  false  doc- 
trines of  sophists,  blown  about  like  ashes  in  a  whirl- 
wind, have  corrupted  multitudes,  have  infected  the 
genius  of  this  age  ;  but  does  anybody  believe  that  the 
contagion  of  this  kind  of  errors  would  not  have  spread, 
if  only  they  had  been  crushed  with  conciliary  anathe- 
mas ?  For  the  support  and  safeguard  of  the  Catholic 
faith,  no  means  and  powers  are  committed  to  us,  in 
addition  to  groans  and  prayers  to  God,  except  Catholic 
learning,  which  is  always  in  harmony  with  right  faith. 
With  the  utmost  assiduity,  learning  hostile  to  the  faith 
is  cultivated  among  errorists  ;  for  that  reason  it  is  high 
time  that  true  learning,  the  friend  of  the  church,  should 
be  cultivated  and  advanced  by  every  means  among 
Catholics.  .  .  .  Let  us  stop  the  mouths  of  the  detract- 
ors who  are  constantly  bringing  against  us  the  false 
accusation  that  the  Catholic  church  is  the  oppressor  of 
learning,  and  that  it  so  trammels  all  free  movements 
of  thought,  that  neither  learning  nor  any  other  free- 
dom of  the  mind  can  exist  or  nourish  within  it.  .  .  . 
On  this  account  it  needs  to  be  shown,  and  to  be  made 


PROCEEDINGS   OF    THE    COUNCIL.  73 

manifest  both  by  words  and  deeds,  that  there  is  in  the 
Catholic  church  real  popular  liberty,  real  progress, 
real  light,  real  prosperity."* 

The  first  month  of  the  Council  was  closing.  A 
"solemn  session"  had  been  appointed  for  the  6th  of 
January,  1870,  at  which  it  had  h*en  hoped  that  some- 
thing— perhaps  even  the  great  doctrine  of  infallibility 
itself — would  have  been  ready  to  be  publicly  proclaimed 
"with  the  approbation  of  the  holy  Council."  But  the 
course  of  the  debate  had  been  too  damaging  to  the 
Schema  that  had  been  introduced,  and  the  hope  of 
introducing  and  carrying  the  declaration  of  infallibility 
by  acclamation  had  been  disappointed,  f  The  solemn 
session  had  to  be  filled  up  with  dumb  shows  of  cere- 
mony, especially  with  the  renewal  of  the  public  oath 
that  every  bishop  had  already  been  compelled  to  take 
at  his  consecration,  in  which  he  "promises  and  swears 
true  obedience  to  the  pope  of  Rome,  the  vicar  of  Jesus 
Christ."|    It  was  not  unreasonable  to  suppose  that  the 

*  Quoted  in  the  original  Latin  by  Lord  Acton,  p.  112,  note, 
American  edition. 

f  Lord  Acton  declares  that  the  purpose  of  "  acclaiming  "  infal- 
libility in  time  to  promulgate  it  on  the  Gth  of  January,  was  foiled 
by  the  resoluteness  of  Archbishop  Darboy  of  Paris,  who  threatened 
that  in  that  case  a  hundred  bishops  stood  ready  to  quit  Rome 
under  protest,  and,  as  he  put  it,  to  "  carry  away  the  Council  in  the 
soles  of  their  shoes,"  p.  112.  See  also  Quirinus,  p.  134.  Arch- 
bishop Manning's  sneer  at  this  statement  in  his  Pastoral  is  of  no 
account,  inasmuch  as  his  testimony,  and,  as  we  are  forced  to  add, 
his  veracity,  on  this  subject  are  shamefully  discredited  by  unim- 
peachable documents. 

X  The  Profession  of  Faith,  or  Oath,  of  Pius  IV.  may  be  found 
in  full  in  that  very  valuable  book  of  reference  on  Tridentine  Ro- 
manism, entitled  "Elliott  on  Romanism,"  published  by  the  Meth. 
Epis.  Book  Concern,  vol.  1,  p.  26.  Those  who  wish  to  study  the 
Romish  system  as  it  was  before  the  Vatican  Council,  will  find  this 
book  the  best  delineation  «of  it  extant.    The  late  Council,  however, 

Vatican  Coiu*  11.  4 


74  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

public  renewal  of  this  vow,  in  the  midst  of  overawing 
solemnities,  might  have  an  influence  on  the  future 
course  of  the  Council. 

Shortly  after  this  solemn  session  of  January  6th, 
the  draft  of  the  Decree  on  the  Faith,  haying  Buffered 
severe  damage  in  th*  debate,  was  withdrawn,  by  the 
managers  of  the  Council,  from  further  discussion,  and 
referred  to  the  elected  Committee  of  the  Council  on 
Doctrine,  for  reconstruction.  In  its  place  was  intro- 
duced the  draft  of  a  decree  on  Discipline,  which  met  no 
kinder  reception  from  men  of  liberal  sympathies  than 
its  predecessor.  Already,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Council,  Cardinal  Schwansenberg,  in  a  paper  distribu- 
ted by  him  to  the  bishops,  had  Signified  the  hope  of 
many  of  the  most  earnest  men  in  the  hierarchy  that 
the  Council,  instead  of  narrowing  the  limits  of  free 
opinion,  and  intensifying  the  rigor  of  administration, 
might  rather  adapt  the  church,  by  wise  modifications, 
to  the  changed  condition  of  the  world,  the  prevailing 
liberty  of  thought  and  speech  and  printing,  the  prog- 
makes  all  former  statements  of  the  Koman  system  inadequate,  by 
incorporating  with  its  infallible  standards  ten  centuries  of  papal 
edicts.  Still,  by  adding  to  this  scholarlike  and  accurate  account  of 
Komanism  as  it  was,  the  prophecy,  now  realized,  of  Romanism  as 
the  doctrine  of  infallibility  would  make  it,  given  in  the  work  of 
Janus,  one  will  be  furnished  with  a  good  beginning  of  informa- 
tion on  the  subject-matter  of  the  Roman-catholic  controversy. 

The  oath  of  Pius  IT. ,  above  quoted,  should  not  be  confounded 
with  the  bishop's  oath  of  allegiance,  temporal  and  spiritual  to  the 
pope,  which  may  also  be  found  in  Elliott,  p.  30.  In  this  oath,  the 
bishop  elect  swears :  "I  will  help  to  keep  and  defend  the  Roman 
papacy  and  the  regalities  of  St.  Peter,  saving  my  order,  against  all 
men.  .  .  .  The  rights,  honors,  privileges,  and  authority  of  the  holy 
Roman  church,  of  our  lord  the  pope  and  his  successors  aforesaid, 
I  will  endeavor  to  preserve,  defend,  increase,  and  advance.  .  .  . 
Heretics,  schismatics,  and  rebels  to  our  said  lord  or  his  successors 
aforesaid,  I  will,  to  the  best  of  my  power*  persecute  and  resist. " 


PROCEEDINGS   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  75 

ress  of  science,  and  the  almost  universal  establishment 
of  constitutional  instead  of  absolute  governments.  In 
particular,  he  deprecated  the  enactment  of  the  dogma 
of  infallibility  as  sure  to  be  the  occasion  of  grave  evils 
to  the  church ;  he  entreated  that  the  abuses  attendant 
upon  keeping  up  the  index  of  prohibited  books  might 
be  abated ;  that  some  of  the  mischiefs  connected  with 
the  usual  mode  of  dealing  with  the  subject  of  marriage 
might  be  relieved ;  that  steps  might  be  taken  to  adapt 
the  constitution  of  the  clergy  to  the  impending  uni- 
versal separation  of  church  and  state,  and  that,  by 
some  other  process  than  the  absorption  by  Rome  of  all 
the  powers  now  held  by  civil  governments  ;  and  finally, 
that  something  might  be  done  to  remedy  the  lamenta- 
ble fact  of  the  almost  universal  indifference  of  intelli- 
gent laymen,  in  Catholic  countries,  to  religion  and  the 
church,  by  admitting  them  to  some  share  in  the  work 
and  care  of  the  parishes,  and  in  the  promotion  of  pop- 
ular education.* 

The  provisions  of  the  proposed  decree  on  discipline, 
tending  in  the  opposite  direction  from  any  such  reform, 
roused  again  the  fiery  eloquence  of  Strossmayer,  whose 
speech  of  the  24th  of  Januaryf  struck  boldly  at  that 
overgrown  centralization  and  absolutism  of  govern- 
ment which  was  the  root  of  abuses  in  administration. 
He  protested  against  vesting  the  absolute  government 
of  Christendom  in  a  knot  of  Italians.  He  claimed  that 
others  than  Italians  should  be  eligible  to  the  papacy, 
and  that  the  "  Roman  congregations  "  which  constitute 
the  bureaucracy  of  the  church,  and  the  college  of  car- 

*  The  paper  is  quoted  by  Lord  Acton,  p.  109,  and  may  be 
found  in  full  in  Prof.  Friedrich's  Bocumenta  ad  lllustr.  Cone.  Vat, 
p.  280. 

t  So  Lord  Acton,  p.  113.  Quirinus  dates  it  on  the  25th,  and 
gives  a  full  abstract  of  it. 


7G  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

dinals,  which  is  the  close  corporation  that  elects  the 
pope,  should  be  made  up  of  a  proportionate  represen- 
tation from  all  Catholic  countries.  "The  supreme  au- 
thority of  the  church,"  he  said,  "should  have  its  throne 
where  the  Lord  had  fixed  his  own,  in  the  hearts  and 
consciences  of  the  peojne,  and  that  would  never  be 
while  the  papacy  was  an  Italian  property."  He  de- 
manded the  frequent  holding  of  Councils,  open  and 
free,  and  cited  the  decree  of  the  Council  of  Constance, 
which  required  that  they  should  be  held  every  ten 
years. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  appointment  of  bishops, 
formerly  limited  in  various  ways,  is  rapidly  falling 
under  the  absolute  control  of  the  pope,  to  the  incalcu- 
lable peril  of  the  church,  he  urged  that  provincial  syn- 
ods should  be  invested  with  influence  in  the  matter. 
"  He  lashed  with  incisive  words  and  brilliant  arguments 
those  who  preach  a  crusade  against  modern  society, 
and  openly  expressed  his  conviction  that  henceforth 
the  church  must  seek  the  external  guarantees  of  her 
freedom  solely  in  the  public  liberties  of  the  nations, 
and  the  internal  by  intrusting  the  episcopal  sees  to  men 
filled  with  the  spirit  of  Chrysostom,  Ambrose,  and 
Anselm."* 

This  speech  does  not  appear  to  have  been  answered. 
It  might  not  have  been  easy  to  answer  it,  and  it  cer- 
tainly was  not  necessary.  There  was  little  danger  that 
in  that  assembly  would  be  found  many  to  sympathize 
with  the  position  or  the  spirit  of  the  speaker.  And 
while  they  were  sure  that  the  voting  would  go  mainly 

*  "The  speech  lasted  an  hour  and  a  half,  and  the  impression 
produced  was  overwhelming.  Bishops  affirm  that  no  such  elo- 
quence in  the  Latin  tongue  has  been  heard  for  centuries.  Stross- 
mayer  does  not  indeed  always  speak  classical  Latin,  but  he  speaks 
it  with  astonishing  readiness  and  elegance."     Quirinus,  p.  170. 


PROCEEDINGS    OF    THE    COUNCIL.  77 

in  one  way,  the  managers  of  the  Council  were  willing 
enough  that  the  argument  should  go  altogether  the 
other  way. 

While  this  discussion  was  in  progress,  the  document 
was  preparing  which  was  to  introduce  the  real  work  of 
the  Council.  It  was. felt  on  all  sides  that  the  matters 
in  debate  were  only  secondary  to  the  one  great  object 
for  which  the  Council  had  been  called.  Said  one  of 
the  leading  organs  of  the  papal  party  :  "In  fact,  there 
is  only  one  question,  and  that  is  urgent  and  inevitable  ; 
the  decision  of  it  would  facilitate  the  progress  and  set- 
tlement of  all  the  rest ;  the  delay  of  it  paralyses  every- 
thing. Without  it  there  is  no  beginning,  nor  the 
chance  of  any."* 

The  document  which  was  designed  to  precipitate 
this  question  upon  the  Council  was  a  petition  to  that 
effect  to  the  pope,  signed  by  more  than  four  hundred 
bishops.  Counter-addresses,  deprecating  the  introduc- 
tion of  the  question  of  infallibility,  were  signed  by  one 
hundred  and  thirty-seven  bishops.  But  the  form  in 
which  these  counter-addresses  were  drawn  gave  evi- 
dence of  that  fatal  weakness  of  the  minority  which 
marked  all  its  movements  as  a  body  from  first  to  last, 
and  proved  the  ruin  of  its  cause  :  with  the  exception 
of  a  comparatively  few  bold  spirits,  the  minority  meant 
constantly  so  to  conduct  their  opposition  as  to  leave  a 
good  chance  to  back  down  from  it  in  case  it  was  not 
successful.  Consequently  the  only  common  ground  of 
opposition  on  which  the  minority  could  be  brought  to 
unite,  was  not  that  the  proposed  dogma  was  false, 
(though  many  of  them  believed  this,)  but  that  the 
definition  of  it  was  inopportune. 

Meanwhile,  a  third  schema,  on  the  church,  and  a 
*  The  Univers,  February  9,  1870. 


78  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

fourth,  providing  for  a  universal  catechism,  were  intro- 
duced, and  debate  dragged  wearily  on.  Things  were 
not  working  well.  In  close  and  consecutive  relation, 
the  monstrous  system  of  Parliamentary  roles  of  the 
22dof  February  whs  imposed,  and  on  the  6th  of  March 
the  draft  of  the  infallibility  decree  was  distributed  to 
the  bishops,  and  the  discussion  of  it  postponed,  in 
order  to  consider  the  first  schema,  which  was  reported 
from  the  committee  toward  the  end  of  March,  amended 
in  such  a  way  as  to  avoid  the  objections  that  had  been 
urged  against  it  in  the  former  debate.  It  seemed  to  meet 
general  acceptance,  but  for  an  expression  in  the  pre- 
amble, in  which  Protestantism  is  made  responsible  for 
the  various  forms  of  modern  unbelief — "the  monstrous 
systems  that  go  by  the  names  of  mythisxn,  rationalism, 
indifferentism."  It  was  not  only  this  objectionable 
clause,  but  the  obnoxious  regulations  under  which  it 
was  about  to  be  put  to  the  vote,  thai  <  ral  bish- 

ops in  opposition,  and  on  the  22d  of  March  brought 
Strossmayer  again  to  the  rostrum  in  a  speech  memora- 
ble for  itself  and  for  the  storm  of  violent  interruptions 
which  it  encountered.  A  considerable  portion  of  this 
speech  is  extant  in  the  Latin  text,  from  which  we  trans- 
late : 

"With  all  respect  for  these  very  learned  men,  let 
me  say  that  to  my  mind  these  assertions  seem  to  be  in 
accordance  neither  with  truth  nor  with  charity.  Not 
with  truth  :  it  is  true  indeed  that  the  Protestants  have 
committed  a  very  grave  fault  in  contemning  and  over- 
ruling the  divine  authority  of  the  church,  and  subject- 
ing the  everlasting  and  unchangeable  truths  of  faith  to 
the  judgment  and  decision  of  the  subjective  reason. 
This  incitement  to  the  pride  of  man  has  given  occasion 
to  evils  unquestionably,  very  grave,  such  as  rationalism, 


PROCEEDINGS    OF   THE    COUNCIL.  79 

criticism,  etc.  But  in  respect  to  this  also,  it  ought  to 
be  said  that  while  Protestantism  exists  in  connection 
with  rationalism,  nevertheless  the  germ  of  rationalism 
was  already  in  existence  in  the  sixteenth  century,  in  the 
so-called  humanism  and  classicism  which  had  been  un- 
advisedly fostered  and  nurtured  in  the  very  sanctuary 
by  certain  men  of  the  highest  authority.  And  unless 
this  germ  had  existed  beforehand,  it  would  be  impossi- 
ble to  conceive  how  so  small  a  spark  could  have  kin- 
dled in  the  midst  of  Europe  a  conflagration  so  great 
that  to  this  day  it  has  been  found  impossible  to  quench 
it.  And  this  other  fact  must  be  added  :  that  contempt 
of  faith  and  religion,  of  the  church,  and  of  all  author- 
ity, originated  independently  of  all  relation  or  kindred 
to  Protestantism,  in  the  midst  of  a  Catholic  nation,  in 
the  eighteenth  century,  in  the  time  of  Voltaire  and  the 
encyclopedists.  .  .  .  Whatever  since  that  time  may  be 
true  of  rationalism,  I  think  the  venerable  committee 
are  entirely  mistaken  when,  in  tracing  the  genealogy 
of  naturalism,  materialism,  pantheism,  atheism,  etc., 
they  assert  that  all  these  errors  are  exclusively  the  off- 
spring of  Protestantism. .  .  .  The  errors  above  enu- 
merated are  an  abhorrence  and  abomination  to  the 
Protestants  themselves,  as  they  are  to  us  ;  insomuch 
that  the  church  and  we  Catholics  are  beholden  to  them 
for  help  and  cooperation  in  resisting  and  refuting  these 
errors.  Thus  Leibnitz  was  a  man  of  unquestionable 
learning,  and  in  every  respect  preeminent ;  a  man  fair 
in  judging  of  the  institutes  of  the  Catholic  church ;  a 
man  brave  in  battling  against  the  errors  of  his  age ;  a 
man  of  the  best  spirit  and  worthy  of  the  best  reward 
as  a  restorer  of  peace  between  Christian  communions. 
[Loud  cries  of  'Oh!  oh!'  The  president,  Cardinal  de 
Angelis,  rang  the  bell,  and  said,  'This  is  no  place  for 


80  THE    VATICAN'    COUNCIL. 

praising  Protestants.']  Such  men  as  these  (and  there 
are  many  such  in  Germany  and  England  and  North 
America)  are  followed  by  a  great  multitude  among  the 
Protestants,  to  all  of  whom  we  may  apply  these  words 
of  the  great  Augustine:  'They  err,  but  they  err  in 
good  faith;  they  are  heretics,  but  they  consider  us 
heretics.  They  did  not  invent  the  error,  but  inherited 
it  from  parents  misled  and  brought  up  in  error,  and  are 
ready  to  give  it  op  the  moment  they  are  convinced.' 
[Hero  there  was  a  long  interruption  and  ringing  of  the 
bell,  with  cries  of  'Shame!  shame T  'Down  with  the 
heretic!']  All  these,  although  they  do  not  belong  to 
the  body  of  the  church,  do  nevertheless  belong  to  its 
soul,  and  are  partakers  in  the  blessings  of  redemption. 
All  these,  in  the  love  they  bear  toward  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord,  and  in  those  positive  troths  which  they  have 
Bayed  from  the  shipwreck  of  the  faith,  are  in  possession 
of  so  many  means  of  divine  grace,  which  the  mercy  of 
God  may  use  to  bring  them  to  the  ancient  faith  and 
church,  unless  we,  by  our  excesses  and  short-sighted 
offences  against  the  charity  we  owe  them,  shall  put  far 
away  the  time  of  the  divine  mercy.  As  to  charity,  it 
certainly  forbids  to  meddle  with  the  wounds  of  another 
with  any  other  object  than  to  cure  them — an  object 
which  this  enumeration  of  the  errors  to  which  Protes- 
tantism might  have  given  rise,  does  not  seem  to  me 
adapted  to  accomplish.  .  .  . 

"  By  the  decree  which  has  recently  been  communi- 
cated to  us  as  a  supplement  to  the  internal  regulations 
of  the  Council,  it  is  determined  that  in  this  Council 
questions  shall  be  settled  by  the  majority  of  votes. 
Against  this  principle,  which  overthrown  from  the 
foundation  all  the  practice  of  former  Councils,  many 
bishops  have  protested,  but  have  received  no  reply. 


PROCEEDINGS    OF  THE    COUNCIL.  81 

But  in  a  matter  of  such  moment,  there  should  be  given 
a  reply  clear,  perspicuous,  and  void  of  all  ambiguity. 
It  looks  to  the  uttermost  calamity  of  this  Council,  for 
it  certainly  will  give  occasion  to  this  and  to  future  gen- 
erations to  say.  that  this  Council  lacked  liberty  and 
truth.  For  my  part,  I  am  convinced  that  the  eternal 
and  unchangeable  rule  of  faith  and  tradition  has  always 
been,  and  must  always  continue  to  be  the  rule  of  com- 
mon consent — of  at  least  moral  unanimity.  The  Council 
which,  overriding  this  rule,  should  undertake  to  define 
dogmas  of  faith  by  a  numerical  majority,  according  to 
my  inmost  conviction  would  by  that  fact  forfeit  the 
right  of  binding  the  conscience  of  the  Catholic  world 
under  the  sanction  of  life  and  death  eternal." 

All  the  latter  part  of  this  speech  was  delivered  in 
the  midst  of  a  great  uproar,  with  furious  demonstra- 
tions of  excitement  from  the  bishops  and  continual 
ringing  of  the  president's  bell,  by  which,  at  last,  the 
speaker  was  silenced.* 

*  The  accounts  of  this  scene  are  given  through  many  different 
channels,  and  are  strikingly  confirmatory  of  each  other's  accuracy. 
The  account  in  Ce  qui  se  passe  au  (Joncile  is  as  follows  : 

"In  the  general  congregation  of  March  23d,  Bishop  Stross- 
mayer  asked  for  the  softening  of  some  violent  expressions  of  the 
schema  '  De  Fide,'  which  made  the  Protestants  responsible  for  athe- 
ism, materialism,  and  rationalism.  In  support  of  his  point,  he  cited 
Leibnitz  in  the  seventeenth  century  and  Guizot  in  the  nineteenth, 
as  having  been  even  useful  auxiliaries  to  the  church.  At  these 
words,  violent  interruptions  and  groans  broke  out.  They  were 
redoubled  when  the  speaker  said  that  there  might  be  Protestants 
who  were  such  in  good  faith.  But  the  uproar  reached  its  highest 
pitch  when  Bishop  Strossmayer  demanded  that  questions  of  dog- 
ma should  be  decided  only  by  moral  unanimity. 

1 '  The  president,  who  had  before  interrupted  him,  called  him 
to  order,  and  forbade  him  to  continue. 

"Confused  cries  broke  out  on  all  sides:  'Descendat  ab  ambone ! 
descenclat !     Hcereiicusf    J  Ferret)  ens  !      Damnamus  eum!     Damna- 

VV'.S  /' 

4* 


82  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

On  the  next  day  the  silenced  speaker  sent  in  his 
protest  to  the  presidents  of  the  Council  in  these  terms  : 

....  "Yesterday,  when  I  had  stated  this  question 
from  the  platform,  and  had  offered  some  remarks  on 

the  necessity  of  morally  unanimous  consent  in  defining 
matters  of  faith,  I  was  interrupted,  and  in  the  midst  of 
a  very  great  uproar  mxl  severe  threats  [inter  maximum 
tumultum  et  graves  comminationes]  I  was  deprived  of 
the  power  of  continuing  my  speech.*  And  this  very 
serious  circumstance  adds  proof  more  clear  than  ever 
of  the  necessity  of  having  an  answer  to  this  question 
that  shall  be  clear  and  void  of  all  ambiguity.  I  there- 
fore most  humbly  petition  that  such  an  answer  may  be 
given  at  the  next  general  congregation.  Other \  ! 
should  be  in  doubt  whether  it  would  be  possible  to  re- 
main in  a  Council  where  the  liberty  of  the  bishops  is  so 
oppressed  as  it  was  yesterday  oppressed  in  my  person, 

"One  bishop  having  said,  'At  ego  riof  the  cry  was 

repeated  more  violently  than  hefore,    lDamma$muI  TktnaumMst 

Bishop  Stroasmayer  was  forced  to  descend  from  the  tribune  with- 
out finishing,  but  as  he  left  it  he  repeated  energetically  three  times, 
'Protestor!  protestor!  protestor!'  The  noise  of  the  tumult  pene- 
trated into  the  interior  of  St.  Peter's  church  ;  and  some  supposing 
that  they  were  dealing  with  infallibility,  shouted,  ' Long  live  the 
infallible  pope  !'  others,  'Long  live  the  pope— but  not  infallible  !' " 

Quirinus  compares  the  hall  of  the  Council  to  a  "bear-garden 
of  demoniacs,"  and  declares  that  "several  bishops  sprang  from 
their  seats,  rushed  to  the  tribune,  and  shook  their  fists  in  the 
speaker's  face."     Pp.  3S5,  426. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  account  of  Archbishop  Maiming  is  in 
serene  and  beautiful  contrast  with  all  other  testimonies:  "Occa- 
sionally murmurs  of  dissent  were  audible  ;  now  and  then  a  com- 
ment may  have  been  made  aloud.     In  a  very  few  instances 

expressions  of  strong  disapproval  and  of  exhausted  patience  at 
length  escaped.     But,"  etc.     Petri  Pnvilegium,  3.  27. 

*  Compare  Archbishop  Manning,  ubi  supra,  "  But  the  descrip- 
tions of  violence,  outcries,  menace,  denunciation,  .  .  .  I  can  affirm 
to  be  calumnious  falsehoods." 


PROCEEDINGS    OF   THE    COUNCIL.  83 

and  where  dogmas  of  faith  are  to  be  denned  in  a  manner 
new  and  hitherto  unheard-of  in  the  church  of  God."* 

The  argument,  though  interrupted  and  silenced, 
was  not  entirely  in  vain.  At  the  last  moment,  the 
obnoxious  preamble  was  withdrawn,  and  a  conciliatory 
substitute,  dexterously  drawn  by  the  hand  of  an  emi- 
nent Jesuit,  was  offered  in  its  place.  With  exquisite 
adroitness,  the  managers  took  advantage  of  the  reac- 
tion of  good  feeling  consequent  on  their  act  of  concili- 
ation, to  introduce  a  little  addition  to  the  schema,  "just 
to  round  it  off  handsomely,"  to  the  effect  that  all  papal 
edicts  ought  to  be  observed,  even  when  they  proscribe 
errors  not  denned  as  heretical.  The  fathers  of  the 
minority  made  wry  faces  over  the  new  amendment,  and 
it  required  extraordinary  efforts,  public  and  private, 
and  the  most  formal  and  solemn  assurance  from  the 
committee  that  reported  it,  that  it  had  no  doctrinal 
application  whatever — that  in  fact  it  was  meant  rather 
for  ornament  than  for  use — to  induce  them  to  vote  for 
it.  "With  grave  misgivings  they  suffered  themselves, 
Strossmayer  alone  excepted,  to  be  led  into  the  trap 
that  had  been  laid  for  them  ;  and  when  it  had  been 
sprang  by  their  own  reluctant  vote  at  the  public  session 
of  April  24th,  and  they  were  helplessly  fastened,  they 
were  openly  and  impudently  twitted  by  Archbishop 
Manning  that  they  had  now,  to  all  intents  and  pur- 
poses, admitted  the  doctrine  of  infallibility,  and  that 
there  was  no  room  left  for  backing  down — "  ncc  ab  ea 
rccedcre  nunc  licere"^  With  this  act  "the  opposition 
was  at  an  end. "J 

*  For  the  original  text  of  speech  and  protest,  see  Lord  Acton's 
Article,  pp.  115,  116. 

f  Quirinus,  pp.  436,  460 ;  Lord  Acton,  p.  116.  But  for  the 
details  of  this  successful  plot,  see  the  testimony  of  Archbishop 
Kcnrick,  bolow,  p.  163.  {  Lord  Acton,  p.  117. 


84  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

The  remaining  history  of  the  Council  may  be  briefly 
told. 

The  draft  of  the  decree  of  infallibility  which  had 
been  for  many  months  in  process  of  incubation  in  the 
pope's  committee  of  theologians,  was  distributed  to  the 
members  of  the  Council  on  the  8th  of  May,  and  their 
written  observations  on  it  called  for,  delivered  to  the 
committee  of  the  Council,  digested  into  a  synopsis,  and 
this  printed  and  distributed  to  the  members  within  a 
week's  time.*     The  debate  on  the  general  subject  began 

*  The  following  extracts  from  tin-  Si/nopsis  are  given  in  the 
Latin  text  by  Lord  Acton,  p.  118.  One  bishop  averred  "that  it 
wus  perfectly  clear  to  his  mind  that  if  infallibility  were  once  dog- 
matically defined,  there  would  be,  in  his  own  diocese,  in  which 
not  a  vestige  of  the  tradition  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Holy  Father 
had  ever  been  found,  and  in  other  regions*  a  defection  from  the 
faith  on  tho  part  of  many  prisons,  and  not  only  those  of  small 
account,  but  those  held  in  the  highest  estimation. "  —  "If  the  dog- 
ma is  promulgated,  the  progress  of  conversions  in  the  confederate 
provinces  of  America  will  be  completely  extinguished.  Bishops 
and  priests,  in  their  discussions  with  Protestants,  will  have  noth- 
ing to  say  in  reply."  [This  observation  is  doubtless  founded  on 
the  fact  that  in  almost  every  considerable  discussion  extant  be- 
tween Romanists  and  Protestants,  some  Protestant  argument  is 
evaded  by  disclaiming  the  ex  cathedra  utterances  of  the  popes  as 
being  of  no  binding  authority  in  the  church,  and  denouncing  the 
alleged  doctrine  of  papal  infallibility  as  "a  Protestant  invention.'"] 
"By  this  definition,  non-Catholics,  among  whom  not  a  few,  and 
those  the  best,  especially  at  this  time,  are  craving  a  firm  basis  of 
faith,  would  find  their  return  to  the  church  rendered  difficult,  and 
indeed  impossible." — "Those  who  would  wish  co  obey  the  decrees 
of  the  Council  will  find  themselves  entangled  in  the  greatest  diffi- 
culties. Civil  governments  will  consider  them  (and  not  without 
the  show  of  probability)  to  be  subjects  of  doubtful  loyalty.  Ene- 
mies of  the  church  will  not  be  slow  to  annoy  them  by  flinging  at 
them  the  errors  which  popes  are  said  either  to  have  taught,  or  by 
their  actions  to  have  sanctioned,  and  the  only  replies  which  it  is 
possible  to  offer  will  be  received  with  ridicule." — "The  decree,  of. 
itself,  defines  in  bulk  even-thing  that  has  ever  formerly  been  defined 
in  papal  instruments.  .  .  .     If  the  definition  is  admitted,  [the  pope"] 


PKOCEEDINGS   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  85 

on  the  14th  of  May.  At  the  close  of  exactly  three  weeks, 
on  the  3d  of  June,  while  forty-nine  bishops  were  still 
waiting  to  be  heard,  all  further  discussion  was  abruptly 
interdicted,  and  the  majority  of  the  Council  pressed 
forward  to  the  new  and  hazardous  experiment,  in  the 
Roman-catholic  church,  of  proclaiming  as  a  dogma,  to 
be  received  under  pain  of  eternal  damnation,  that  which 
part  of  the  episcopate  did  not  believe.* 

After  some  supplementary  debate  on  the  details  of 
the  decree,  a  private  vote  was  taken,  which  showed  88 
negative  votes  ;  61  votes  in  a  qualified  affirmative  ;  and 
91  bishops  who  abstained  from  voting,  although  pres- 
ent in  Rome.f 

will  have  power  to  decide  on  temporal  dominion,  or  the  extent  of 
it,  on  the  power  of  deposing  kings,  on  the  usage  of  coercing  here- 
tics."—  "The  doctrine  of  papal  infallibility  seems  to  me  to  have  no 
foundation  whether  in  the  Holy  Scripture  or  in  church  tradition. 
Indeed,  unless  I  mistake,  Christian  antiquity  held  the  contrary  doc- 
trine."— "  The  phraseology  of  the  schema  implies  the  existence,  in 
the  church,  of  a  double  infallibility— that  of  the  church  itself  and 
that  of  the  pope— which  is  absurd  and  unheard-of." — "If  I  were 
to  use  the  subterfuges  which  have  been  used  by  not  a  few  theolo- 
gians in  the  case  of  Honorius,  I  should  make  myself  a  laughing- 
stock. To  resort  to  sophistries  seems  to  me  unworthy  both  of  the 
episcopal  office  and  of  the  nature  of  the  subject,  which  ought  to 
be  treated  in  the  fear  of  God." — "Many  of  the  authorities  which 
are  quoted  in  proof  of  it,  even  by  the  most  esteemed  of  the  class 
of  theologians  called  ultramontane,  are  mutilated,  falsified,  inter- 
polated, garbled,  spurious,  twisted  out  of  their  proper  meaning. " — 
"I  venture  to  assert  that  the  opinion  [of  infallibility]  as  it  lies  in 
the  schema,  is  not  a  doctrine  of  the  faith,  and  cannot  be  made 
such  by  any  definition  whatever,  even  definition  by  a  Council." 

*  Parts  of  the  speeches  of  Archbishops  Purcell  of  Cincinnati 
and  Conolly  of  Halifax  are  given  by  Quirinus  and  Lord  Acton  ; 
and  the  speech  of  Archbishop  Darboy  is  given  in  full  in  the  Ap- 
pendix to  Quirinus,  pp.  819,  833.  Part  of  the  Latin  original  is 
given  by  Acton,  pp.  118,  119,  nole. 

f  The  names  of  these  240  bishops  are  given  by  Quirinus,  pp. 
778-785.  A  slight  discrepancy  of  figures  will  be  remarked  between 
this  and  the  statement  in  the  next  note. 


8G  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

The  voters  in  the  negative  1  *  it  Rome  in  a  body  on 
the  17th  of  July,  the  day  before  the  public  vote  was  to 
be  taken,  leaving  behind  them  a  sorrowful  protest,*  in 

*  The  document  is  given,  in  Latin,  in  Quirinus,  pp.  797  7'.'!», 
and  is  as  follows  : 

Most  Blessed  Fatiiki:  :  In  the  general  congregation  held  <>n 
the  13th  instant,  we  gave  ont  votes  on  the  achrma  of  the  first 
dogmatic  constitution  de  EcdesiA  GhrlsH. 

Your  Holiness  is  aware  that  there  were  88  fathers  who,  moved 
by  stress  of  conscience  and  by  love  for  the  holy  church,  voted  by 
the  words  "non  placet,"  02  others  who  voted  by  the  words  "plaed 
juxta  modum,"  and  finally,  about  70  who  absented  themselves  from 
the  congregation,  and  abstained  from  voting.  To  these  are  to  be 
added  others  who,  on  account  of  illness  or  other  weighty  reasons, 
have  returned  to  their  dioc 

For  this  reason,  our  votes  have  been  known  and  manii 
Your  Holiness  and  to  all  the  world,  and  it  has  been  made  plain 
how  many  bishops  approve  of  onr  opinion,  and  in  this  way  we  dis- 
charge the  duty  and  office  inoumbenl  upon  us. 

Since  that  time,  nothing  certainly  has  occurred  to  change  our 
views,  but  on  the  other  hand  many  things,  and  those  of  the  gravest 
character,  have  taken  place,  which  have  settled  us  in  our  determi- 
nation. We  therefore  declare  that  we  renew  and  confirm  our  votes 
already  given. 

Confirming,  then,  our  votes,  by  this  writing,  we  have  decided 
to  absent  ourselves  from  the  public  session  to  be  holden  on  the 
18th  instant.  For  that  filial  piety  and  reverence  which,  but  a  brief 
time  since,  brought  our  representatives  to  Your  Holiness'  feet,  do 
not  suffer  us,  on  a  question  so  closely  concerning  the  person  of 
Your  Holiness,  to  say  "non  placet"  openly  to  the  pope's  face. 

And  furthermore,  the  votes  to  be  given  in  the  solemn  session 
would  be  only  a  repetition  of  the  votes  already  elicited  in  the  gen- 
eral congregation. 

Without  delay,  then,  we  return  to  our  flocks,  where,  after  so 
long  an  absence,  we  are  very  greatly  needed,  on  account  of  the 
alarms  of  war,  and  especially  on  account  of  their  extreme  spirit- 
ual wants  ;  lamenting  that  in  consequence  of  the  unhappy  circum- 
stances with  which  we  are  surrounded,  we  are  likely  to  find  the 
peace  and  repose  of  consciences  among  our  believing  people  bro- 
ken up. 

Commending,  meanwhile,  with  all  our  heart,  the  church  of 
God  and  Your  Holiness  (to  whom  we  profess  unfeigned  faith  and 


PllOCEEDINGS    OF   THE    COUNCIL.  87 

the  hands  of  the  pope.  Two  only,  one  of- whom  was 
Bishop  Fitzgerald  of  Little  Rock  in  the  United  States, 
had  the  courage  to  be  present  at  the  public  session  on 
the  18th  of  July,  and  boldly  give  their  public  votes  in 
the  negative. 

The  new  doctrine  was  promulgated  July  18,  1870, 
in  the  midst  of  a  storm  which  darkened  the  church  of 
St.  Peter's.  Within  a  few  hours  there  burst  over 
Europe  a  storm  of  war,  which  stayed  not  until  it  had 
swept  away  the  throne  of  the  infallible  pope  from  un- 
derneath him. 

obedience)  to  the  grace  and  keeping  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  we 
remain 

Your  Holiness'  most  devoted  and  obedient  sons. 
Rome,  July  17,  1870. 


88  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

CHAPTER   VII. 

THE  SPEECH  OF  ARCHBISHOP  KENBICK. 

Whkn,  on  the  third  day  of  June,  1870,  the  deb 
of  the  Council  on  the  main  question  were  suddenly 
silenced,  there  remained  on  the  list  of  those  who  hud 
signified  their  intention  to  speak,  the  names  of  some 
forty  bishops  who  were  still  unheard.  They  were  for- 
bidden by  the  rules  of  the  Council  even  to  print  their 
views  so  much  as  for  private  circulation  among  the 
bishops;  and  the  spiritual  prohibition  was  reinf 
by  police  arrangements  which  Locked  eyery  printing- 
office  in  Rome  against  them.  An  American  prelate, 
however,  Archbishop  Kenrick  of  St.  Louis,  refused  to 
be  thus  gagged.  Claiming  a  "divine  right  to  express 
his  convictions  on  this  most  important  question  to  his 
fellow-bishops,"  he  sent  the  carefully  prepared  manu- 
script of  his  Latin  speech  to  a  printer  in  Naples,  where 
under  the  flag  of  an  excommunicated  king,  might  be 
found  that  liberty  for  the  bishops  of  the  church  which 
was  denied  them  in  the  States  of  the  Church  itself. 

The  solid  octavo  pamphlet  of  one  hundred  pages 
which  was  the  result  of  this  enterprise,  was  distributed 
among  the  members  of  the  Council  with  scrupulous 
care,  lest,  becoming  known  to  outsiders,  it  might  reveal 
with  an  undeniable  mark  of  authenticity  those  facts  in 
the  interior  history  of  the  Council,  which,  when  report- 
ed by  irresponsible  correspondents,  it  was  so  easy  to 
deny  with  a  show  of  indignation.  Furthermore,  that 
fatal  forethought  with  which  the  opposition,  by  looking 
out  constantly  for  a   line   of   retreat,   had  constantly 


SPEECH    OF   ARCHBISHOP    KENKICK.        89 

weakened  their  own  cause,  was  an  additional  motive 
for  keeping  the  speech  private.  In  case  its  earnest 
arguments  should  be  disregarded  or  overborne  by  the 
majority,  and  the  dogma  be  adopted,  it  was  important 
to  keep  the  bold  statements  of  this  "unspoken  speech" 
hushed  up,  in  order  that  the  author  of  it  might,  if 
worst  should  come  to  worst,  by-and-by  avoid  the  em- 
barrassment of  publicly  repudiating  his  own  printed 
words,  and  of  accepting  under  constraint,  what  he 
could  not  be  brought  to  accept  by  argument. 

It  was  vain  to  suppose  that  documents  confiden- 
tially printed  in  editions  of  700  could  always  be  kept 
from  the  public.  One  of  the  copies  of  this  speech  has 
come,  by  a  roundabout  course,  to  our  hands.  For  its 
intrinsic  ability  and  its  incidental  historical  value,  it  is 
entitled  to  be  spread  before  the  public  without  abridg- 
ment.* 

*  Since  this  translation  was  written,  a  second  Latin  copy  of  the 
speech  has  come  to  hand,  in  Professor  Friedrich's  Documenta  ad 
illustrandum  Concilium  YaUeanum.  The  original  having  been  thus 
made  accessible  to  scholars,  we  are  excused  from  the  necessity  of 
cumbering  this  edition  in  English  with  the  entire  Notes  and 
Appendix  attached  by  the  author  to  his  work. 


CONCIO 
PETRI  RICARDI  KEMICK 

ARCfflEPISCOPI  S.  LUDOVICI 

IN  STATIBUS  FCEDElt  ATIS 
AMERICA  SEPTENTRIONALIS 

IN 

CONCILIO  VATICANO 

HABENDA  AT  NON  HABIT  A 


O  Timothee,  depositum  custodi,  devitans  profanaa 
vooam  novitates  et  oppositiones  falsi  uominis 
scientiae,  quam  quidani  promittentes  circa 
Mem  exciderunt.     1  Tim.  vi.  20.  21. 

Non  super  uno  Petro  veruni  super  omnes  aposto- 
los  apostolorumque  successorea,  Ecclesia  Dei 
aediflcatus.    pAscHAsirs  Radbertus. 

Lib.  viii.  In  Matt.  xvi. 


NEAPOLI 

TYPIS  ERATRUM  DE  ANGELIS 

IN  VIA  PELLEGRINI  4 

MDCCCLXX 


SPEECH 


OF 

PETER  RICHARD  KENRICK, 

ARCHBISHOP  OF  ST.  LOUIS 

IN 

THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  NORTH  AMERICA, 
PREPARED  FOR  SPEAKING  BUT  NOT  SPOKEN 

IN    THE 

VATICAN  COUNCIL. 


O  Timothy,  keep  that  which  is  committed  to 
thy  trust,  avoiding  profaue  and  vain  bab- 
blings, and  oppositions  of  science  falsely  so 
called,  which  some  professing  have  erred 
concerning  the  faith.     1  Tim.  6  :  20,  21. 

Not  on  Peter  only,  but  on  all  the  apostles 
and  their  successors,  is  built  the  Church 
of  God.    Paschasius  Radbebt. 

Book  viii,  on  Matt.  16. 


NAPLES, 

DE  ANGELIS  BROTHERS,  PRINTERS, 

4  VIA  PELLEGRINI. 

1870. 


NOTE. 

The  reason  why  this  speech  was  not  delivered, 
although  prepared  for  that  purpose,  is  this — that  on 
the  third  day  of  June,  at  the  close  of  the  general  con- 
gregation, a  stop  was  unexpectedly  put  to  the  general 
discussion  on  the  first  schema  concerning  Catholic  faith. 
Among  forty  bishops,  more  or  less,  who  had  entered 
their  names  as  desiring  to  be  heard,  was  the  writer  of 
the  following.  He  has  deemed  best  that  his  divine 
right  of  expressing  his  views  on  this  momentous  busi- 
ness to  his  fellow-bishops,  and  to  others  who  are  enti- 
tled to  an  interest  in  the  Council,  should  be  exercised 
through  the  press.  But  he  has  retained  the  form  of  a 
speech,  and  some  matters  that  would  be  pertinent  only 
in  a  spoken  discourse. 
Eome,  June  8,  1870. 


CONTENTS   OF   THE   SPEECH. 

1  Introduction  :  The  occasion  of  the  speech. 

I.  The  writer's  "Observations"  vindicated. 

[1.  To  allege  that  all  the  apostles,  as  well  as  Peter,  are  styled 
the  foundation,  does  not  impair  the  argument  in  favor  of  the  pri- 
macy of  the  pope. 

2.  There  is  no  argument  for  papal  supremacy  in  John  21 :  16, 17. 

3.  The  word  faith  in  Luke  22  :  32  means  only  trust,  and  there- 
fore yields  no  argument  for  infallibility.] 

II.  The  universal  jurisdiction  of  the  apostles  still 
continues  in  the  whole  body  of  bishops. 

[The  argument  of  the  archbishop  of  Dublin  is  suicidal.  If  the 
promise  made  to  all  the  apostles  is  not  fulfilled  in  their  successors 
the  bishops,  then  the  promise  made  to  Peter  does  not  hold  good 
to  iris  successors  in  the  see  of  Rome.  ] 

III.  The  scriptural  proofs  of  the  primacy  of  the 
Eoman  pontiff  brought  to  the  test. 

[1.  The  primacy  of  the  Roman  see  is  proved  by  tradition. 

2.  It  cannot  be  proved  by  Scripture  :  Exegesis  of  Matt.  16:18, 
10  ;  John  21:16,  17  ;  Luke  22:32. 

3.  Resume  of  the  argument.] 

IY.  Views  of  the  late  F.  P.  Kenrick,  archbishop  of 
Baltimore. 

V.  The  assent  of  "the  Church  Dispersed." 

[1.  The  assent  has  a  negative  value. 

2.  Not  sufficient  for  the  definition  of  new  dogmas. 

3.  Instance  of  the  bull  Unam  Sanctam  which  proclaimed  ex 
cathedra  the  doctrine  of  the  subjection  of  temporal  governments 
to  the  pope,  and  had  universal  assent,  but  is  now  generally,  though 
not  universally,  repudiated,  ] 

VI.  Former  views  of  M.  J.  Spalding,  present  arch- 
bishop of  Baltimore. 

VII.  Speech  of  the  archbishop  of  Westminster.  No 
substantial  distinction  between  doctrine  of  faith  and 
doctrine  of  the  Catholic  faith. 


94  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

[Distinction  between  theology  and  faith. 

Councils  are  infallible  in  testifying,  not  in  alleging  reasons  of 
opinion. 

This  distinction  has  been  lost  sight  of. 

Objection  :  This  argument  impeaches  the  doctrine  of  the  im- 
maculate conception. 

Answer  :  This  doctrine  is  not  defide.] 

VIII.  The  Infallibility  of  the  Pope  has  not  been 

taught  as  a  doctrine  of  faith  in  England,  or  Ireland,  or 

the  United  States  of  America. 

[Whether  true  or  false,  it  never  oaa  be  made  an  article  of  faith,* 
even  if  the  Council  should  define  it. 

1.  It  has  never  been  so  tanghf  by  (he  church  ; 

2.  But  has  been  impugned  by  her,  almost  everywhere  but  in 
Italy,  and  especially  in  England.  Jr. -land,  and  the  United  Stat.  s. 

3.  Even  by  the  Pltramontanee  it  has  been  tanght  only  as  free 
opinion. 

Instances:  "Roman-catholic  Principles;"  Archbishop  Spal- 
ding's Sermons. 

It  is  mentioned  only  to  disclaim  it,  when  alleged  by  Protes- 
tants. 

Testimony  of  Irish  tradition. 

It  was  solemnly  disclaimed  when  Catholic  emancipation  was  in 
question.] 

IX.  A  Case  of  Conscience. 

X.  The  "Charisma"  of  Infallibility. 

XL  The  addition  to  the  first  Decree  de  Fide, 
[The  trick  played  upon  the  minority. 
Sinister  influences  in  the  Council. 

Conclusion  :  The  precipitation  of  the  question  a  calamity  to 
the  church  and  the  world.  ] 

APPENDIX. 

A.  Second  Plenary  Council  of  Baltimore. 

[Undue  influence  of  the  papal  legate,  and  tampering  with  the 
record.  ] 

B.  The  Committee  on  Faith. 

[Manipulation  of  Elections.  Packing  of  the  Committee.  Ser- 
vitude of  the  Council.] 


Most   Eminent   Presidents;    Most    Eminent   and 
Eight  Reverend  Fathers: 

The  Most  Reverend  the  Archbishop  of  Dublin, 
in  his  speech  from  this  platform,  has  said  some  things 
by  which  my  honor  is  sorely  wounded.  It  was  in 
vain  that  I  begged  permission  of  His  Eminence  the 
president  to  reply  at  once,  at  the  close  of  his  speech, 
or  at  least  at  the  close  of  that  day's  general  congre- 
gation. Therefore  it  is  that,  contrary  to  my  previous 
purpose,  I  take  the  floor  to-day  to  speak  on  the 
schema  in  general  that  is  offered  for  our  adoption; 
for  I  had  taken  for  granted  that  everything  pertinent 
to  the  subject  would  be  more  fully  and  forcibly  said 
by  others  than  I  could  say  it.  I  entreat  your  par- 
don, most  eminent  and  right  reverend  fathers,  if  I 
seem  to  weary  you  with  a  longer  speech  than  I  am 
wont  to  make.  I  only  ask  that  you  will  grant  me 
that  liberty  which  (as  Bossuet  says)  well  becomes  a 
bishop  addressing  bishops  in  Council,  and  having 
respect  rather  to  the  future  than  to  the  present — in 
the  confidence  that  I  will  not  wander  from  the  scope 
of  the  schema,  nor  say  anything  which  can  give  just 
offence  to  any  one — least  of  all  to  the  most  eminent 
the  archbishop  of  Dublin,  to  whom  I  acknowledge 
my  very  great  obligations,  to  whom  I  have  always 
looked  up  with  respect,  for  these  thirty  years  and 
more,  and  wliom  I  hope  and  trust  I  shall  continue  to 
respect  to  my  latest  breath.  With  which  preliminary 
words  I  come  to  the  subject. 


96  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

I.  The  observations  numbered  one  hundred  and 
thirty-eight  in  the  synopsis,  on  which  His  Eminence 
of  Dublin  so  severely  reflects,  I  acknowledge  to  be 
mine.  I  wrote  in  them  nothing  but  wliat  I  thought, 
and  (except  so  far  as  may  appear  to  the  contrary 
from  the  present  speech)  nothing  but  what  I  still 
think.  Three  points  thereof  have  been  attacked  in 
terms  of  special  severity  by  the  most  reverend  ] (rel- 
ate. First,  that  I  said,  on  page  217,  that  all  the 
other  apostles  were  designated  by  the  same  name  of 
foundation  which  was  applied  to  Peter;  which  seem- 
ed to  him  to  impair  the  proof  of  the  primacy  of  the 
Roman  pontiff  deduced  by  theologians  from  that 
word.  The  blame  of  this,  to  be  sure,  should  not  be 
laid  on  me,  but  on  St.  Paul  and  St.  John.  Rut  that 
this  was  the  furthest  possible  from  my  intention  is 
proved  by  the  words  which  I  used,  as  follows:  "The 
words  of  Christ,  Thou  art  Peter,  etc.,  certainly  show 
that  a  privilege  was  conferred  by  Christ  on  Peter 
above  the  other  apostles,  so  that  he  should  be  the 
primary  foundation  of  the  church ;  which  the  church 
has  always  acknowledged,  by  conceding  to  him  the 
primacy  both  of  honor  and  of  jurisdiction."  I  de- 
nied, indeed,  that  by  virtue  of  that  ward  foundation 
the  gift  of  infallibility  was  conferred  upon  Peter 
above  the  other  apostles;  since  no  mortal  ever 
thought  of  claiming  this  privilege  for  the  other  apos- 
tles and  then  successors  from  the  mere  fact  that  they 
too  had  been  honored  with  the  same  title  of  founda- 
tion. I  then  showed  it  to  be  a  false  inference  that 
the  stability  of   the  church  was   derived  from   the 


SPEECH    OF    ARCHBISHOP    KENKICK.         97 

strength  of  the  foundation,  since  Christ  had  signified 
that  he  would  provide  for  each  of  these  in  some 
other  way;  that  is,  in  the  words,  addressed  to  all 
the  apostles,  Peter  with  the  rest,  "Lo,  I  am  with 
you  always,  even  to  the  end  of  the  world."  It  is 
hardly  fair  to  say  that  by  this  line  of  reasoning  I 
had  either  assailed  or  meant  to  assail  the  common 
arguments  for  the  primacy  derived  from  Christ's 
words,  "  Thou  art  Peter,"  etc.  But  I  shall  show,  by- 
and-by,  that  the  most  reverend  archbishop  himself, 
by  the  line  of  reasoning  which  he  adopts  in  speaking 
of  the  other  apostles,  and  their  successors  the  bish- 
ops, not  only  impeaches  this  argument  for  the  pri- 
macy, but  utterly  destroys  it. 

Secondly,  the  archbishop  of  Dublin  asserted, 
and  that  with  emphasis,  that  what  I  had  written 
about  John  21 :  10,  17,  was  not  true;  to  wit,  that  the 
words  lambs  and  sheep  which  there  occur  in  the  Vul- 
gate version — from  the  distinction  between  which, 
by  an  argument  more  subtle  than  solid,  some  were 
wont  to  infer  that  both  bishops  and  simple  believers 
are  committed  to  the  pastoral  care  of  the  Roman 
pontiff  as  Peter's  successor — corresponded  to  one 
and  the  same  word,  -npofiuTLa,  in  the  Greek  text ;  and 
that  therefore  the  argument  was  groundless.  I  can- 
not sufficiently  wonder  that  the  most  reverend  arch- 
bishop should  have  ventured  to  put  forth  such  an 
assertion ;  especially,  as  in  talking  about  it,  he  seemed 
to  get  the  word  ^poparta  changed  for  KpojSura.  The 
Greek  text  revised  a  few  years  since,  in  accordance 
with   the   oldest   manuscripts,   by  Tischendorf,    (to 


98  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

whom,  if  I  remember  correctly,  the  pope  sent  a  letter 
of  approval  for  the  work  which,  after  vast  labor,  he 
had  so  successfully  accomplished,)  shows  that  I  was 
right.  I  have  here  the  seventh  edition,  published  in 
1859,  from  which  I  will  read  the  entire  passage,  add- 
ing to  the  successive  answers  of  Christ,  the  Vulgate 
version  of  them,*  so  that  you  may  plainly  perceive 
that  His  Eminence  of  Dublin  lias  been  affected  in  this 
matter  by  some  measure  of  human  fallibility.  Let 
me  add,  that  on  the  arch  over  the  pope's  throne  in 
St.  Peter's  church,  where  these  verses  are  displayed 
in  Greek,  you  may  read  Kpop&na,  but  not  qrfltra. 

In  the  little  work  D<  Pontificia  Inftdtibilitate,  almost 
of  the  same  tenor  as  the  Ohs<  rvations  aforesaid,  which 
1  had  printed  lately  at  Naples,  by  a  typographical 
error  the  word  wpSpara  occurs  instead  of  irpopdna,  as  it 
was  in  my  manuscript,  and  as  it  appears  in  the  Sy- 
nopsis. But,  after  all,  it  is  a  fact  that  in  the  Greek 
text  of  Halm  the  same  word  irpopara  does  correspond 
to  both  the  words,  lambs  and  sheep,  in  the  place  cited. 
But  the  only  difference  produced  by  the  variation  of 
reading  is  this :  In  Teschendorf's  text  there  is  noth- 
ing whatever  to  correspond  to  the  word  sheep ;  for 
npoSuTia  means  either  little  lambs  or  little  sheep,  but  not 
sheep  at  all.  But  in  the  other  text,  of  Halm,  the  word 
Kpo&ara  signifies  sheep;  notwithstanding  which  the 
author  of  the  Yulgate  version  chose  to  make  a  vari- 
ation, by  rendering  the  same  word  irpopara  in  one  case 

*  John  21:15.  Boone  tu  upvia  fiov — Pasce  agnos  meos. 

1C.  UoiuaivE  tu  TipopuTiu  fiov — Pasce  agnos  meos. 
17.  Boone  tu  Tzpoi3driu  [xov  —Pasce  oves  meas. 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KEN1UCK.         99 

by  lambs  and  in  the  other  by  sheep.*  My  assertion, 
which  the  archbishop  of  Dublin  over  and  over  again 
declared  with  such  emphasis  to  be  untrue,  is  shown 
to  be  absolutely  true,  whichever  of  the  two  readings 
is  adopted.  As  to  the  Oriental  versions  cited  by  His 
Eminence,  I  do  not  care  to  speak,  being  satisfied  to 
have  demonstrated  the  truth  of  my  assertion.  But 
from  what  I  shall  say  by-and-by,  it  will  appear  that 
it  is  of  trifling  consequence  what  sense  we  attribute 
to  these  words,  since  I  shall  easily  show  that  (con- 
trary to  what  I  had  said  in  the  Observations)  no  in- 
ference can  be  derived  from  them  in  support  of  the 
infallibility,  or  even  of  the  primacy,  of  the  pope. 

In  the  third  place,  the  most  reverend  archbishop 
calls  me  to  account  for  what  I  said  concerning  the 
word  faith  in  Luke  22  :  32  ;f  that  that  word  was  never 
used  by  our  Lord  to  mean  the  system  of  doctrines, 
(in  which  sense  alone  it  can  afford  any  ground  for  an 
argument  in  support  of  papal  infalhbility,)  and  not 
more  than  once  or  twice  to  mean  that  act  of  super- 
natural virtue  with  which  we  believe  in  God  making 
revelation  of  himself.     I  asserted  that  by  that  word 

[*  There  is  a  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  in  these  terms: 
.  .  .  .  "  The  sacred  and  holy  Synod  .  ,  .  .  doth  ordain  and  declare 
that  the  said  old  and  Vulgate  edition  ....  be,  in  public  lectures, 
disputations,  preachings,  and  expositions,  held  as  authentic ;  and 
that  no  one  is  to  dare  or  presume  to  reject  it  under  any  pretext 
whatsoever."  Act.  Cone.  Trid.,  Sess.  4.  How  Archbishop  Kenrick 
justifies  himself  in  rejecting  the  Vulgate  version  of  this  text,  in 
favor  of  the  true  reading  and  correct  translation,  we  are  not  pre- 
pared to  say  ;  but  it  is  probably  on  the  ground  that  this  was  not 
intended  as  a  public  exposition,  but  as  a  private  and  confidential 
communication  to  his  fellow-bishops.     Translator.  ] 

f    "I  have  prayed  for  thee,  that  thy  faith  fail  not." 


100  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

(as  may  be  gathered  from  tlie  discourses  of  the  Lord) 
was  almost  always  meant  trust  or  confidena  I 
showed  that,  in  the  passage  cited,  the  word  had  this 
sense  and  no  other,  holding  to  the  rale  that  the  cus- 
tomary meaning  of  a  word  is  to  be  retained,  unless 
the  context  requires  a  different  one — and  in  the  pres- 
ent case  the  context  favors  the  usual  meaning.  The 
most  reverend  archbishop  said— perhaps  not  meas- 
uring the  force  of  his  words-  that  this  assertion  of 
mine  smacked  of  the  Calvinistie  heresy  ;  in  proof  of 
which  he  adduced  John  11 :  27,  the  words  in  which 
Martha  professes  her  belief  in  Christ,  which  we  arc 
compelled  to  understand   concerning  faith  in  the 

Catholic  sense  of  the  word. 

But  the  excellent  bishop  did  not  notice  that  in 
my  Observation  the  question  was  not  how  to  define 
the  true  nature  of  gracious  faith  as  a  "theological 
virtue,"  but  only  as  to  the  force  of  the  woi&fatih  in 
its  customary  usage  in  the  discourses  of  Christ.  Out 
of  twenty-nine  passages  in  the  gospels  in  which  this 
word  occurs,  (which  may  be  easily  seen  by  consult- 
ing the  concordance  of  the  Lathi  Bible,)  there  are 
only  two— Matt.  23  :  23,*  and  Luke  18  :  8t— in  which 
the  word  faith  can  possibly  be  taken  in  the  sense  of 
the  theological  virtue  of  faith.  All  the  other  passa- 
ges give  the  meaning  of  trust  or  confidence,  ot faith  of 
miracles.     In  Luke  22  :  32,J  which  is  the  passage  in 

*  .  .  .  "  The  weightier  matters  of  the  law,  judgment,  mercy, 
and  faith. " 

t  "When  the  Son  of  man  cometh,  shall  he  find  faith  on  the 
earth?" 

t   "I  have  prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not." 


SPEECH    OF    AECHBISHOP    KENRICK.       101 

question,  this  seemed,  and  still  seems,  to  me  to  be 
proved  to  be  the  true  meaning,  both  by  the  custo- 
mary usage  of  the  word  and  by  the  context.  And 
the  most  reverend  archbishop  has  brought  forward 
nothing  in  disproof  of  this  statement.*    • 

II.  I  now  proceed  to  show  that  the  archbishop 
of  Dublin,  by  his  course  of  reasoning,  has  emptied 
the  words,  "  Thou  art  Peter,"  etc.,  of  all  the  force 
which  theologians  have  commonly  thought  them  to 
contain.  He  denies  that  the  bishops,  as  successors 
of  the  apostles,  have  that  universal  jurisdiction  in 
the  church  which  the  apostles  received  from  Christ ; 
which  indeed  is  true  if  we  speak  of  the  individual 

[*  It  is  pretty  clear  that  Archbishop  Cullen  took  the  measure 
of  his  words  more  accurately  than  Archbishop  Keurick  gives  him 
credit  for.  On  the  one  hand,  Kenrick  is  unmistakably  and  un- 
answerably right  in  the  definition  he  gives  of  the  "Word  faith  as  used 
in  the  gospels.  On  the  other  hand,  his  antagonist  is  right  in 
declaring  that  this  definition  smacks  of  Protestantism.  For  the 
authorized  Roman-catholic  definition  of  faith  is  the  intellectual 
assent  to  certain  dogmas  as  revealed.  Now  when  Archbishop  Ken- 
rick shows  that  the  faith  to  which  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  promised 
eternal  life  is  not  that  act  which  the  Roman  church  exacts  as  the 
condition  of  salvation,  but  is  really  that  act  of  committing  oneself 
in  trust  and  confidence  to  the  Saviour,  which  is  set  forth  by  evangel- 
ical preachers  as  the  way  of  salvation,  he  does  certainly  pull  out 
one  of  the  foundation  stones  on  which  the  whole  fabric  of  the 
Romish  system  is  built. 

It  is  hardly  possible  to  overrate  the  importance  of  this  point. 
It  is  a  cardinal  point  in  the  whole  controversy.  Grant  the  Romish 
definition  of  faith,  and  the  Romish  doctrine  of  justification  easily 
follows  ;  for  the  mere  intellectual  receiving  of  dogmas  does  of  itself 
neither  justify  nor  sanctify.  Grant  this  definition,  and  the  fig- 
ment of  an  infallible  tribunal  of  dogma,  constantly  sitting  and 
emitting  decrees,  is  necessitated.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  gos- 
pel definition  of  faith,  as  stated  by  Dr.  Kenrick,  is  admitted,  the 
gospel  system  of  truth  naturally  follows.     Tkanslatok.  ] 


102  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

bishops  outside  of  a  general  council,  but  is  not  true 
if  understood  of  the  body  of  bishops,  whether  in 
council  or  not.  If  (he  power  given  to  the  apostles, 
of  preaching  the  gospel  in  the  whole  earth,  is  to  be 
restricted  to  themselves,  although  it  was  given  by 
Christ  to  continue  "to  the  end  of  the  world,"  it  is 
impossible  to  prove  that  the  privilege,  whatever  it 
may  have  been,  conferred  upon  Peter  in  the  words, 
"  Thou  art  Peter,"  etc.,  descended  to  his  successors, 
the  popes.  The  argument,  therefore,  derived  from 
these  words  in  Matthew  16:18,  19,  falls  to  the 
ground  from  the  fact  that  the  words  of  Christ  in 
the  28th  chapter,  verses  18,  20,  of  the  same  evan- 
gelist, receive  a  less  literal  interpretation;  for  the 
question,  in  both  passages,  is  on  the  power  be- 
longing to  the  sacred  ministry,  and  not  on  any  sign 
of  their  divine  mission,  such  as  working  miracles, 
speaking  with  tongues,  or  some  other  such  gift. 
Either,  then,  the  whole  of  this  power  of  the  ministry 
passed  to  their  successors,  or  none  of  it ;  and  surely 
this  last  cannot  be  said.  I  have  not,  therefore,  in- 
fringed upon  the  proof  of  the  primacy  from  the  words, 
"Thou  art  Peter,"  etc.;  on  the  contrary,  I  have 
explicitly  acknowledged  that  proof.  But  the  arch- 
bishop, by  denying  that  the  universal  jurisdiction 
granted  to  the  apostles  has  descended  to  their  suc- 
cessors, has  done  that  very  thing  himself. 

I  thus  prove  that  all  the  ministerial  privileges 
granted,  whether  to  Peter  or  to  the  rest  of  the  apos- 
tles, have  descended  to  their  successors ;  making  no 
inquiry  at  present  what  was  the  nature  of  these  priv- 


SPEECH    OF    ARCHBISHOP   KENEICK.       103 

ileges,  or  by  what  sort  of  evidence  they  are  proved 
to  have  been  conferred. 

Whatever  belongs  to  the  sacred  ministry  in  the 
church  of  Christ  by  the  institution  of  its  Founder, 
must  belong  to  it  always ;  otherwise  the  church  would 
not  be  such  as  he  instituted  it.  Therefore  those 
privileges  granted  to  the  apostles  which  concern  the 
function  committed  to  them,  are  the  same  now  as 
when  they  were  first  conferred.  This  is  equally  true 
of  those  which  were  given  to  all,  including  Peter,  and 
of  that  which  was  granted  to  Peter  individually.  On 
the  day  of  the  resurrection,  Christ  gave  commission 
to  all  the  apostles,  always  including  Peter,  in  the 
words,  *'As  the  Father  hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I 
you,"  John  20 :  21 ;  and  afterwards,  when  he  was 
abcut  to  ascend  into  heaven,  in  the  words,  "  Go, 
teach  all  nations,"  etc.,  Matt.  28  :  19,  20.  But  these 
words,  addressed  to  all,  concern  them,  not  as  if  spo- 
ken to  them  individually,  but  to  them,  as  constituting 
:i  sort  of  college  of  apostles;  which  is  clear  from 
the  fact  that  Thomas,  though  absent  when  Christ 
appeared  to  the  apostles  on  the  resurrection  day, 
received  (as  all  admit)  the  same  commission  and  the 
same  power  of  remitting  sins  as  the  rest.  This 
apostolic  college  is  constituted  a  moral  person,  which 
is  to  continue  to  the  end  of  the  world ;  whose  iden- 
tity is  no  more  diminished  by  the  perpetual  succes- 
sion of  its  members,  than  our  personal  identity  is 
affected  by  the  constant  change  of  the  elements  that 
compose  our  "bodies.  Thus  it  stands  ever  before 
men  a  living   eye-and-ear  witness  of  those  things 


104  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

which  Christ  did  and  taught;  so  that  it  may  always 
use  the  words  of  John,  (1st  epistle,  1 : 3,)  "  What  we 
have  seen  and  heard  declare  we  unto  von/'  What- 
ever power,  then,  it  had  at  its  origin  it  has  now: 
divine  commission  ("  as  the  Father  hath  sent  me ") 
and  universal  jurisdiction  ("Go,  teach  all  nations") 
must  be  acknowledged  to  belong  now  to  the  apostol- 
ic college.  And  if  this  be  denied  or  even  weakened, 
the  whole  Christian  religion  falls  to  the  ground. 

From  which  I  infer  that  the  successors  of  Peter 
and  the  rest  of  the  apostles,  constituting  the  apos- 
tolic college,  have  every  power  now  which  they  bad 
when  the  college  was  first  instituted  by  Christ  The 
individual  bishops,  taken  singly,  receive,  by  the 
ordinances  of  the  college  itself,  only  an  ordinary 
local  jurisdiction  in  their  several  dioceses.  But  the 
bishops,  taken  universally,  have  a  universal  jurisdic- 
tion; not  in  that  sense  exactly  that  the  universal 
jurisdiction  is  made  up  by  the  sum  of  the  local  juris- 
dictions ;  but  that  the  bishops  universally,  whether 
dispersed  and  separated  from  each  other,  or  united 
in  a  general  council,  constitute  the  apostolic  college. 
Hence  the  words  of  Cyprian,  "  There  is  one  episco- 
pate, an  undivided  part  of  which  is  held  by  every 
bishop,""  receive  light  and  a  ready  explanation.  If 
the  most  reverend  archbishop  of  Dublin  is  not  pre- 
pared to  admit  all  this,  at  least  he  must  confess  that 
the  several  bishops  united  in  General  Council  have 

[*  "Episcopatus  tmus  est,  cujus  a  singulis  in  solidum  pars 
tenetur."  The  phrase  is  one  often  quoted  from  the  treatise  Ik 
Unit.  Ec.cl,  and  much  disputed  as  to  its  rendering.     Tr.1 


SPEECH    OF    ARCHBISHOP    KENUICK.       105 

universal  jurisdiction.  This  jurisdiction  the  illustri- 
ous archbishop  of  Nisibis,*  at  the  end  of  the  second 
volume  of  the  French  translation  of  his  History  of 
General  Councils,  tries  to  show  is  derived  by  the 
bishops  directly  from  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  virtue  of 
their  consecration,  while  he  refers  their  local  juris- 
diction to  the  Roman  pontiff.  But  the  school  of 
theologians  to  which  I  adhere  considers  all  episcopal 
jurisdiction  to  be  held  by  the  bishops  by  immediate 
derivation  from  Christ,  but  that  the  ordinary  local 
restriction  of  it  had  no  other  origin  than  the  ordi- 
nance of  the  church,  in  due  subordination,  neverthe- 
less, to  the  Koman  pontiff  as  the  head  alike  of  the 
apostolic  college  and  of  the  universal  church.  I  say, 
therefore,  that  the  words  of  Christ  spoken  to  the 
apostles  lose  none  of  their  force  to  the  successors  of 
the  apostles ;  and  in  this  I  lay  down  nothing  which 
tends  to  weaken  the  argument  which  theologians  are 
accustomed  to  deduce  from  Matt.  16  :  18,  in  proof  of 
the  primacy  of  the  Koman  pontiff.  This  argument  I 
now  proceed  to  examine. 

III.  I  beg  you  so  far  to  indulge  me,  most  emi- 
nent and  reverend  fathers,  as  to  give  me  your  calm 
attention  while  I  say  things  which  doubtless  will  not 
be  agreeable  to  many  of  you.  I  am  not  about  to 
set  forth  anything  heretical  or  savoring  of  heresy, 
(as  the  remarks  of  the  archbishop  of  Dublin  may 
have  led  you  to  fear,)  nor  anything  opposed  to  the 
principles  of  the  faith,  nor  anything  but  what,  so 
far  as  my  slender  abilities  permit,  I  shall  endeavor 

[  *  Cardoni,  one  of  the  pope's  theologians.  ] 


lOo  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

to  sustain  with  solid  argument.  One  thing  I  wish 
to  give  warning  of:  I  speak  for  myself  only,  not  for 
others;  and  I  do  not  know  but  that  what  I  am  about 
to  say  may  give  dissatisfaction  even  to  those  with 
whom  I  take  sides  in  the  discussion  of  this  question. 
If,  in  the  course  of  my  speech,  I  happen  to  speak 
too  sharply  on  any  point,  remember  and  imitate  the 
example  of  those  leaders  who  were  persuaded  to 
patience  by  the  famous  saying,  "Strike,  but  hear." 
I  shall  pav  due  respect  to  Their  Eminences  the  mod- 
erators o(  the  congregation;  but  I  will  not  be  pat 
down  by  commotions.* 

The  primacy  of  the  Roman  pontiff,  both  in  honor 
and  in  jurisdiction,  in  the  universal  church,  1  ac- 
knowledge. Primacy,  I  say,  not  lordship.  Bat  that 
the  primacy  is  vested  in  him  as  the  successor  of  Pe- 
ter, all  the  tradition  of  the  church  testifies,  from  the 
beginning.  And  on  the  sole  strength  of  this  testi- 
mony I  accept  it  as  an  absolutely  certain  principle 
and  dogma  of  faith.  But  that  it  can  be  proved  from 
the  words  of  Holy  Scripture,  by  any  one  who  would 
be  faithful  to  the  rule  of  interpretation  prescribed  to 
us  in  that  profession  of  faith  which  Ave  have  uttered 
at  the  opening  of  this  Council,!  and  so  often  on 

[*  Motibus  aidem  non  cedam.  The  fact  that  the  writer,  prepar- 
ing his  speech  in  advance,  should  deem  it  needful  to  announce  this 
determination,  suggests  obvious  inferences  concerning  the  charac- 
ter of  the  sessions  of  the  Council,  and  calls  for  explanation  from 
Archbishop  Manning.  ] 

[f  The  "Creed  of  Pius  IV."  (see  above,  p.  73,  note)  declares: 
"I  will  never  take  nor  interpret  the  Holy  Scripture  except  in 
accordance  with  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  fathers."  Arch- 
bishop Kenrick  goes  on  to  say,  with  truth,  that  there  never  is  any 


SPEECH   OF  ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       107 

other  occasions,  I  deny.  It  is  true  that,  following 
the  principles  of  exegesis,  I  held  the  opposite  view 
when  I  was  writing  the  Observations  which  the  arch- 
bishop of  Dublin  has  attacked  so  sharply.  But  on 
a  closer  study  of  the  subject,  I  judge  that  this  inter- 
pretation must  be  abandoned.  My  reason  for  this 
change  of  opinion  is  the  following : 

The  rule  of  Biblical  interpretation  imposed  upon 
us  is  this  :  that  the  Scriptures  are  not  to  be  interpret- 
ed contrary  to  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  fathers. 
It  is  doubtful  whether  any  instance  of  that  unanimous 
consent  is  to  be  found.  But  this  failing,  the  rule 
seems  to  lay  down  for  us  the  law  of  following,  in 
their  interpretation  of  Scripture,  the  major  number 
of  the  fathers,  that  might  seem  to  approach  unanim- 
ity. Accepting  this  rule,  we  are  compelled  to  aban- 
don the  usual  modern  exposition  of  the  words,  "  On 
this  rock  will  I  build  my  church." 

In  a  remarkable  pamphlet  "  printed  in  facsimile 
of  manuscript,"  and  presented  to  the  fathers  almost 
two  months  ago,  we  find  five  different  interpretations 
of  the  word  rock,  in  the  place  cited;  "the  first  of 
which  declares"  (I  transcribe  the  words)  "that  the 
church  was  built  on  Peter  : '  and  this  interpretation 
is  followed  by  seventeen  fathers — among  them,  by 
Origen,  Cyprian,  Jerome,  Hilary,  Cyril  of  Alexandria, 
Leo  the  Great,  Augustine. 

"The  second   interpretation   understands  from 

such  unanimous  consent.  Literally,  then,  the  creed  is  a  vow  not 
to  receive  nor  interpret  the  Scriptures  at  all — in  which  sense,  there 
is  no  doubt  that  it  is  sometimes  fulfilled  with  great  faithfulness 
an  1  consistency.  ] 


108  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

these  words,  '  On  this  rock  will  I  build  my  church/ 
that  the  church  was  built  on  all  the  apostles,  whom 
Peter  represented  by  virtue  of  the  primacy.  And 
this  opinion  is  followed  by  eight  fathers — among 
them,  Origen,  Cyprian,  Jerome,  Augustine,  Theo- 
doret. 

"  The  third  interpretation  asserts  that  the  words, 
'On  this  rock/  etc.,  are  to  be  understood  of  the 
faith  which  Peter  had  professed— that  this  faith,  this 
profession  of  faith,  by  which  we  believe  Christ  to  be 
the  Son  of  the  living  God,  is  the  everlasting  and  im- 
movable foundation  of  the  church.  This  interpreta- 
tion is  the  weightiest  of  all,  since  it  is  followed  by 
forty-four  fathers  and  doctors;  among  them,  from 
the  East,  are  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Cyril  of  Alexandria, 
Chrysostom,  Theophylact;  from  the  West,  Hilary, 
Ambrose,  Leo  the  Great ;  from  Africa,  Augustine. 

"The  fourth  interpretation  declares  that  the 
words,  '  On  this  rock/  etc.,  are  to  be  understood  of 
that  rock  which  Peter  had  confessed,  that  is,  Christ — 
that  the  church  was  built  upon  Christ.  This  inter- 
pretation is  followed  by  sijctcot  fathers  and  doctors. 

"  The  fifth  interpretation  of  the  fathers  under- 
stands by  the  name  of  the  rock,  the  faithful  them- 
selves, who,  believing  Christ  to  be  the  Son  of  God, 
are  constituted  living  stones  out  of  which  the  church 
is  built." 

Thus  far  the  author  of  the  pamphlet  aforesaid, 
in  which  may  be  read  the  words  of  the  fathers  and 
doctors  whom  he  cites. 

From  this  it  follows,  either  that  no  argument  at 


SPEECH   OF  ARCHBISHOP  KENKICK.       109 

all,  or  one  of  the  slenderest  probability,  is  to  be  de- 
rived from  the  words,  "  On  this  rock  will  I  build  my 
church,"  in  support  of  the  primacy.  Unless  it  is 
certain  that  by  the  rock  is  to  be  understood  the  apos- 
tle Peter  in  his  own  person,  and  not  in  his  capacity 
as  the  chief  apostle  speaking  for  them  all,  the  word 
supplies  no  argument  whatever,  I  do  not  say  in  proof 
of  papal  infallibility,  but  even  in  support  of  the  pri- 
macy of  the  bishop  of  Kome.  If  we  are  bound  to 
follow  the  majority  of  the  fathers  in  this  thing,  then 
we  are  bound  to  hold  for  certain  that  by  the  rock 
should  be  understood  the  faith  professed  by  Peter, 
not  Peter  professing  the  faith.  And  here  I  must  be 
allowed  to  bring  forward  a  signal  example  of  a  less 
ingenuous  interpretation,  presented  in  the  little  vol- 
ume lately  published  here  at  Kome,  by  an  excep- 
tional privilege,  by  the  reverend  archbishop  of  Edes- 
sa,  which,  by  the  leave  of  that  venerable  man,  I 
wish  to  speak  of ;  for  in  a  matter  of  this  importance 
we  are  bound  to  use  the  plainest  words,  if  they  are 
but  true.  The  book  is  commended  by  a  squad  of 
eleven  eminent  theologians  under  the  command  of 
the  learned  Father  Perrone,  to  the  supreme  pontiff, 
by  whose  permission,  doubtless,  it  is  excepted  from 
the  rule  which  prevents  the  bishops  from  communi- 
cating their  views  to  each  other  through  the  press, 
unless  they  are  willing  to  get  the  use  of  the  press 
somewhere  else  than  in  Home. 

The  two  principal  interpretations,  which  under- 
stand by  the  rock  Peter,  and  Peter's  faith,  having 
been  cited,  and  the  observation  being  made  that  the 


110  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

former  was  common  before  the  Arian  heresy,  but 
that  the  other  gained  ground  afterwards  on  account 
of  the  rise  of  the  controversy  on  the  divinity  of 
Christ,  the  most  reverend  author  proceeds -with  Ids 
lucubration  in  the  following  words,  pp.  7  and  8  : 

"But  it  will  be  obvious  to  any  one  who  will  take 
the  following  things  into  consideration,  how  mutually 
consistent  are  both  these  expositions  of  the  gospel 
text.  For  the  establishment  and  preservation  of 
unity,  Christ  sets  the  person  of  Peter  and  his  succes- 
sors in  the  primacy,  as  the  centre,  that  all  believers 
might  be  conjoined  at  once  in  unity  of  faith  and  of 
fellowship.  But  since  unity  consists  not  only  in  the 
fellowship  of  all  belieyers,  but  especially  in  the  one- 
ness of  faith,  which  is  greater  than  fellowship,  it  was 
absolutely  necessaiy  both  that  the  foundation  of  the 
ecclesiastical  structure  should  be  laid,  and  that  the 
centre  of  unity  should  be  established,  not  in  the 
mere  person  of  Peter,  but  also  in  the  faith  which  he 
preached.  For  if  the  foundation  of  the  church  were 
laid  only  in  the  person  of  Peter,  and  not  also  in  the 
solidity  of  his  faith,  then,  the  faith  of  Peter  failing, 
the  unity  of  the  church  would  be  lost,  and  a  plural- 
ity of  churches  would  be  formed  upon  the  variation 
in  the  profession  of  faith.  If  therefore  Christ  wished 
the  church  to  be  one,  in  the  unity  of  faith  and  fel- 
lowship ;  if,  in  order  to  the  perpetual  preservation  of 
this  unity,  he  set  the  person  of  Peter  in  the  relation 
of  foundation  and  centre,  it  behooved  him  also  to  set 
Peter's  most  solid  faith,  which  he  professed  and 
preached,  as  the  foundation ;  otherwise  he  would  not 


SPEECH    OF    ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       Ill 

have  attained  the  end  wliich  lie  had  set  before 
himself  in  establishing  the  church.  Wherefore, 
since  both  Peter's  person  and  the  faith  which  he 
preached  are  the  foundation  of  the  church,  it  is  clear 
that  that  same  rock-like  firmness  which  is  the  glory 
of  Peter's  person  is  also  to  be  ascribed  to  his  faith, 
lest,  without  it,  the  whole  building  should  tumble. 
Therefore  both  expositions  of  these  words  of  Christ 
are  happily  in  accordance  with  his  intention  in  found- 
ing the  church,  and  one  of  them  serves  to  throw  light 
on  the  other.  Therefore  the  fathers  of  the  earlier 
centuries,  applying  these  words  to  the  person  of  Pe- 
ter, not  only  do  not  exclude  the  second  interpreta- 
tion, but  by  implication  presume  it ;  for,  admitting 
the  person  of  Peter  to  be  the  immovable  foundation- 
rock  of  the  whole  structure  of  the  church,  they  are 
bound  by  implication  to  admit  at  the  same  time  his 
faith  also  as  standing  in  the  same  relation  of  founda-^ 
tion;  since  identity  of  faith  is  the  foundation  of  the 
unity  of  the  whole  building.  On  the  other  hand, 
they  who  hold  that  Peter's  faith  is  the  rock  laid  by 
Christ  for  the  foundation  of  the  church,  do  not  ex- 
clude Peter's  person,  but  only  teach  more  explicitly 
in  what  way  Peter  is  to  be  understood  as  the  reck 
and  foundation  of  the  church.  Hence  there  are 
several  of  them  who  give  both  expositions,  as  may 
be  seen  in  St.  Augustine." 

To  say  nothing  of  the  fact  that  the  author  takes 
for  granted,  in  these  observations,  the  thing  in  ques- 
tion, namely,  that  Christ  founded  his  church  on  Pe- 
ter's personal  faith,  and  that  a  consequence  of  this 


112  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

is  the  infallibility  of  Peter's  successors,  I  remark 
only  on  one  point.  Out  of  the  passages  of  the  fathers 
which  he  quotes  through  six  or  seven  pages,  there 
are  many  which  are  capable  of  being  understood 
either  of  Peter  professing  his  faith,  that  is,  of  Peter's 
subjective  faith,  or  of  the  faith  professed  by  Peter, 
that  is,  of  Peter's  -faith  taken  objectively.  But  to 
make  his  argument  good  for  anything,  the  author 
had  to  prove  that  the  fathers  cited  by  him  spoke  of 
the  subjective  and  not  the  objective  faith  of  Peter — 
which  he  has  quite  neglected  to  do. 

It  seems  to  me,  after  some  thought  upon  the 
diversity  of  interpretations,  that  they  may  all  be 
resolved  into  one,  by  taking  into  consideration  the 
distinction  between  the  foundation  on  which  a  house 
is  built,  and  the  foundation  which  is  laid  in  the  build- 
ing of  it.  The  builder  of  a  house,  especially  if  it  is 
to  be  a  great  house,  and  to  stand  a  long  time,  begins 
with  digging  down  until  he  comes,  as  the  phrase 
goes,  "to  the  live  rock;"  and  on  this  he  lays  the 
foundations,  that  is,  the  first  course  of  the  building. 
If  we  admit  this  double  meaning  of  foundation,  all 
the  diversity  of  interpretations  disappears ;  and  many 
passages  of  Scripture,  which  at  first  might  seem  dif- 
ficult to  reconcile  with  each  other,  receive  great  light. 
The  natural  and  primary  foundation,  so  to  speak,  of 
the  church,  is  Christ,  whether  we  consider  his  per- 
son, or  faith  in  his  divine  nature.  The  architectural 
foundation,  that  laid  by  Christ,  is  the  twelve  apostles, 
among  whom  Peter  is  eminent  by  virtue  of  the  pri- 
macy.    In  this  way  we  reconcile  those  passages  of 


SPEECH   OF  ARCHBISHOP   KENIilCK.       113 

the  fathers,  which  understand  him  on  this  occasion, 
(as  in  the  instance  related  in  John  6,  after  the  dis- 
course of  Christ  in  the  synagogue  of  Capernaum,)  to 
have  answered  in  the  name  of  all  the  apostles,  to  a 
question  addressed  to  them  all  in  common ;  and  in 
behalf  of  all  to  have  received  the  reward  of  con- 
fession.* 

In  this  explanation  of  the  word  rod;  the  primacy 
of  Peter  is  guarded,  as  the  primary  ministerial  foun- 
dation; and  the  fitness  of  the  words  of  Paul  and 
John  is  guarded,  when  they  call  all  the  apostles  by 
the  common  title  of  the  foundation ;  and  the  truth 
of  the  expression  used  with  such  emphasis  by  Paul, 
is  guarded :  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than 
that  is  laid,  even  Christ  Jesus,"  1  Cor.  3:2;  and  the 
adversaries  of  the  faith  are  disarmed  of  the  weapon 
which  they  have  so  effectively  wielded  against  us, 
when  they  say  that  the  Catholics  believe  the  church 
to  be  built,  not  on  Christ,  but  on  a  mortal  man ;  and 
(a  matter  of  no  small  account  in  the  present  discus- 
sion) the  underpinning  is  taken  out  from  the  argu- 
ment which  the  advocates  of  the  infallibility  of  the 
pope  by  himself  alone  are  wont  to  derive  from  a 
figurative  expression  of  doubtful  meaning — riding 
the  metaphor  to  death — to  prove  that  he  received 
from  Christ  an  authority  not  only  supreme,  but  ab- 
solute. But  whatever  may  be  thought  of  this  opin- 
ion of  mine,  it  is  obviously  impossible  to  deduce  from 

*  S.  Hieeonymus,  in  Matt.  16  :  15,  10.  S.  Augustinus,  Enarr. 
in  Psa.  108,  n.  1.  Idem,  in  Joannis  Evangelium,  118,  n.  4.  S.  Am- 
brosius,  in  Psa.  38  :  37. 


114  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

the  words,  "Thou   art  Peter,"  etc.,  a  peremptory 
argument  in  proof  even  of  the  primacy.* 

As  to  the  other  words  of  Christ  to  Peter,  "Feed 
my  lambs,"  and  "  Feed  my  sheep,"  it  may  be  said 
that  by  that  threefold  commission  Christ  showed 
that  Peter  had  not  fallen,  by  liis  threefold  denial, 
from  the  privilege  by  which  lie  had  been  called  to 
partnership  with  the  apostles;  and  that  this  was 
continued  to  him  in  reward  for  the  greater  love  he 
bore  towards  his  Lord  above  the  rest.  As  August  ine 
says,  "The  triple  confession  answers  to  the  triple 
denial,  so  that  his  tongue  might  give  no  less  service 
to  his  love  than  to  his  fear,  and  so  that  impending 
death  should  not  seem  to  have  drawn  out  more  from 
him  than  present  life."*  The  argument  adduced  by 
Bellarmine,  that  the  words  "my  sheep"'  and  "my 
kimbs"  include  the  whole  flock  of  Christ,  and  there- 
fore show  that  the  power  conferred  by  them  extends 
to  all,  proves  nothing  at  all.  For  they  are  no  more 
general,  nor  do  they  any  more  express  the  idea  of 
government,  than  those  which  Paul  addressed  to  the 
elders  at  Miletus  collectively :  "  Take  heed  to  your- 
selves and  to  aV  theflock\  over  which  the  Holy  Ghost 
hath  made  you  bishops,  to  rulej  (Troiuaimv)  the  church 

*  After  the  above  had  been  sent  to  the  printer,  I  happened  on 
n  passage  in  Paschasius  Radbert,  which  expresses  the  same  idea  in 
advance  of  me:  "Licet  super  eodem  fundamento  primus  ac  si  ca- 
put Petrus  recte  positus  credatur,  tamen  in  ea  petra  de  qua  nome.i 
sibi  ex  dono  traxit,  et  super  earn  tota  construitur,  et  constabilitu; 
ilia  ccelestis  Jerusalem,  id  est,  super  Christum,  ut  linn  a  permane.it 
in  asternuni."     Expos,  in  Matt.,  lib.  8,  ch.  16. 

f  In  Joann.  E vang. ,  ch.  123,  n.  5. 

X   Vulgate,  Universo  gregi.  §   Vuhjate,  Regere. 


SPEECH   OF   AKCHBISHOP   KENRICK.      115 

of  God  which  he  hath  purchased  with  his  own  blood." 
Acts  20  :  28  * 

That  the  words,  "  I  have  prayed  for  thee,"  etc., 
do  not  have  the  sense  commonly  attributed  to  them, 
but  are  to  be  understood  of  Peter's  fall  at  the  time 
of  the  passion,  and  his  subsequent  conversion,  I 
have  tried  to  show  in  my  Observations. t     "  This  in- 

*  See  S.  Basil.,  Constit.  Monastic,  ch.  22,  n.  5.     S.  Augustin., 
De  Agone  Christ iano,  ch.  30. 

f  The  following  is  an  extract  from  the  Observations  alluded  to: 
• '  Neither  is  there  any  more  value  as  a  proof  of  papal  inerran- 
cy in  those  words  of  Christ  to  Peter  (Luke  22  :  31,  32)  in  which 
the  advocates  of  this  opinion  think  to  find  their  main  argument. 
Considering  the  connection  in  which  Christ  uttered  them,  and  the 
words  which  he  proceeded  to  address  to  all  the  apostles,  it  does 
not  appear  that  any  gift  pertaining  to  the  government  of  the 
church  was  then  granted  or  promised  to  Peter,  much  less  that  the 
gift  of  inerrancy  in  the  government  of  it  was  declared  to  him.  It 
was  a  warning  by  which  the  Lord  exhorted  him  to  overcome  the 
impending  temptation  to  which  he  was  going  to  be  exposed,  and 
at  the  same  time  an  intimation  that  after  his  fall  he  should  be  con- 
verted and  strengthen  the  rest  of  the  apostles.  Christ  prayed 
therefore  for  Peter,  who,  as  he  was  distinguished  above  the  other 
apostles  in  his  work,  was  sought  above  the  rest  to  be  sifted  by  Sa- 
tan, and  was  foreseen  to  be  above  the  rest  liable  to  lapse.  Christ 
prayed  for  him  that  his  faith  might  not  fail  —that  is,  that  he  might 
not  wholly  or  for  ever  lose  that  trust  by  which  thus  far  he  had 
clung  to  Christ ;  and  that  after  his  fall,  coming  to  himself  again, 
that  is,  being  converted,  he  should  add  courage  to  the  rest.  This 
Peter  did  after  the  Lord's  resurrection,  when  he  announced  the 
fact  to  the  other  disciples,  as  appears  from  the  words,  '  The  Lord 
is  risen  indeed,  and  hath  appeared  unto  Peter.'  Luke  24:«3i.  The 
words  of  Christ,  then,  are  to  be  understood,  not  of  faith  as  a  body 
of  doctrine,  in  which  sense  it  is  never  used  by  the  Lord  ;  nor  yet 
of  faith,  the  theological  virtue  by  which  we  believe  in  God,  in 
which  sense  it  occurs  in  his  discourses  no  more  than  once  or  twice, 
but  of  that  trust  by  which,  thus  far,  he  had  clung  to  him  as  a 
Master.  And  if  a  few  of  the  early  intei-preters,  and  the  crowd  of 
the  moderns,  have  understood  these  words  differently,  and  have 
found  them  to  contain  the  conferring  upon  Peter  of  the  office  of 


116  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

terpretation,"  says  the  author  of  the  pamphlet  printed 
in  facsimile,  "is  one  of  great  reputation  and  author- 
ity, given  by  forty-four  fathers  and  doctors  both  of  the 
most  ancient  and  of  later  times."  For  so  the  words 
were  understood  through  the  first  six  centuries  of  the 
church.  The  fact  that  they  afterwards  received  an- 
other meaning,  seems  to  have  grown  out  of  the  com- 
mon usage  of  ecclesiastical  writers,  of  interpreting 
the  words  of  Scripture  in  an  accommodated  sense 
instead  of  the  literal  sen 

In  addition  to  the  remarks  on  this  subject  is  my 
Observations,  I  take  pleasure  in  adding  some  tilings 
which  seem  to  confirm  my  view  of  the  meaning  of' 
Christ's  words.  From  the  fact  that  the  Saviour, 
after  speaking  to  all  the  apostles  and  informing  them 
that  Satan  had  sought  them,  to  sift  them  as  wheat, 
turns  then  to  Peter  with  the  words,  "I  have  prayed 
for  tltee" — which  must  necessarily  be  understood  of 
him  alone,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  rest,  since,  after 
being  converted,  he  was  to  strengthen  the  others — it 
is  inferred  that  some  peculiar  thing  was  promised  to 
Peter  in  these  words.  In  fact  this  is  true,  but  some- 
thing considerably  different  from  the  extraordinary 
gift  commonly  understood  to  have  been  promised  to 
Peter  in  them. 

Can  it  be  said  that  Christ  prayed  for  Peter  alone, 
but  that  he  provided  no  safeguard  for  the  others, 
about  to  encounter  so  great  a  peril  ?    How  then  does 

confirming  in  the  faith  his  brethren,  that  is,  the  rest  of  the  apos- 
tles and  their  successors  the  bishops,  this  does  not  impose  upon 
other  people  any  necessity  of  abandoning  the  simple  and  literal 
meaning. " 


SPEECH    OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENKICK.      117 

it  come  to  pass  that  the  others  stood  firm,  unsus- 
tained  by  any  extraordinary  assistance,  while  Peter, 
for  whom  singly  Christ  prayed,  so  grievously  fell? 
The  true  reason  why  the  Saviour  addressed  the  words 
to  him  alone  seems  to  be  this :  He  prayed  indeed  for 
all,  as  we  cannot  but  take  for  granted.  But  to  Peter 
he  intimated,  by  directing  his  words  exclusively  to 
him,  (just  as,  after  Peter's  answer  in  verse  33,  he 
proceeded  to  say  it  more  plainly  in  verse  34,)  that 
he  would  deny  his  Master.  Thus  he  warned  him  of 
his  approaching  fall,  and  foretold  his  conversion,  and 
that  by  him  the  rest  were  to  be  confirmed.  The 
Lord's  words  so  understood  give  a  clear  sense.  Be- 
side the  repeated  warning  given  to  Peter,  they  con- 
tain the  prophecy  of  his  conversion;  so  that  when 
Peter,  having  come  to  himself,  clearly  recollected  it, 
it  left  no  doubt  in  his*  mind  of  the  pardon  which  he 
should  obtain,  and  thus  saved  him,  it  may  be,  from 
despair  in  view  of  his  most  grievous  sin. 

Besides,  the  successive  words  addressed  by 
Christ  to  Peter  cannot  be  understood  of  his  succes- 
sors without  involving  an  extraordinary  absurdity. 
The  words,  ""When  thou  art  converted,"  certainly  re- 
fer to  Peter's  conversion.  If  the  foregoing  words,  "  I 
have  prayed  for  thee,"  and  the  following,  "  Strength- 
en thy  brethren,"  prove  that  the  Divine  assistance 
and  the  office  have  descended  to  his  successors,  it 
does  not  appear  why  the  intermediate  words,  "  when 
thou  art  converted,"  should  not  belong  to  them  too, 
and  in  some  sense  be  understood  of  them.* 

[*  There  is  an  extremely  telling  stroke  of  covert  sarcasm  here, 


118  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

In  saying  these  things,  I  am  not  greatly  affected 
by  the  accusation  lately  levied  against  me,  without 
mentioning  my  name,  by  the  right  reverend  bishop 
of  Elphin  (treading  in  tin*  footsteps  of  the  archbishop 
of  Dublin)  when  he  gave  vent  to  his  grief  of  heart 
that  there  should  be  any  among  the  bishops  who 
would  not  scrapie  to  take  the  texts  of  Holy  Scripture 
and  other  citations  in  proof  of  papal  infallibility,  and 
interpret  them  in  the  sense  accepted  by  heretics! 
"If  these  things,"  said  that  excellent  man,  "are 
done  in  the  green  tree,  what  shall  be  done  in  the 
dry?"  My  answer  to  him  and  to  others  is  this: 
Following  the  example  of  Iremens,  Tertnllian,  Au- 
gustine, and  Vincent  of  Leans,  1  believe  that  the 
proofs  of  the  Catholic  faith  are  to  be  sought  rather  hi 
tradition  than  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures.* 
"  Interpretation  of  Scripture, '*  says  Tertullian,  "  is 
better  adapted  to  befog  the  truth  than  to  demon- 
strate it."  Of  the  testimonies  derived  from  tradition, 
there  are  some  which,  I  think,  will  have  to  be  given 
up ;  as  in  the  phrase  of  Iremcus  on  the  superior 
authority  which  he  is  commonly  thought  to  have 

as  well  as  a  substantial  argument.  It  is  more  than  implied  that  if 
the  words  impute  to  the  popes  Peter's  commission  and  Peter's 
grant  of  divine  grace,  they  must  impute  to  them  also  Peter's  con- 
version and  therefore  Peter's  apostasy.  It  was  quite  unnecessary 
for  the  author  to  do  more  than  suggest  to  his  intended  audience,  that 
the  popes  might  perhaps  succeed  better  in  vindicating  their  succes- 
sion to  Peter  by  the  signs  of  apostasy  than  by  the  signs  of  grace.  ] 
[*  This  frank  and  unreserved  acknowledgment  would  perhaps 
hardly  have  been  made  in  a  document  intended  for  the  promiscu- 
ous public.  But  it  is  sustained  by  weighty  authorities  in  Roman 
theology.  Some  of  these  may  be  found  cited  by  Lord  Acton, 
p.  101] 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENEICK.       I1D 

claimed  for  the  Roman  church.  But  I  have  taken 
the  responsibility  of  this  concession,  alleging  sub- 
stantial reasons,  which  ought  to  be  met,  not  with 
abuse,  but  with  other  reasons. 

It  has  seemed  to  me  that  nice  refinements  upon 
figures  of  speech  had  better  be  laid  aside ;  but  I 
have  appealed  to  the  faith  of  the  Councils  and  the 
fathers,  which  shows  that  such  subtleties  do  not 
agree  with  the  ancient  doctrine  and  practice  of  the 
church  universal,  but  rather  contradict  them.  This 
method  of  reasoning  is  better  fitted  for  bringing 
back  Protestants  into  the  bosom  of  the  church,  than 
arguments  the  very  principles  of  which  they  reject ; 
and  which,  although  they  may  seem  impregnable  to 
less  intelligent  Catholics,  nevertheless  are  proved  by 
the  experience  of  the  last  three  centuries  to  be  ill 
adapted  for  putting  an  end  to  controversies. 

I  close  this  part  of  my  speech  with  a  brief  sum- 
ming up  of  the  argument : 

We  have  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  perfectly  clear 
testimonies  of  a  commission  given  to  all  the  apostles, 
and  of  the  divine  assistance  promised  to  all.  These 
passages  are  clear,  and  admit  no  variation  of  mean- 
ing. "We  have  not  even  one  single  passage  of  Scrip- 
ture, the  meaning  of  which  is  undisputed,  in  which 
anything  of  the  kind  is  promised  to  Peter  separately 
from  the  rest.  And  yet  the  authors  of  the  schema 
want  us  to  assert  that  to  the  Koman  pontiff  as  Pe- 
ter's successor  is  given  that  power  which  cannot  be 
proved  by  any  clear  evidence  of  holy  Scripture  to 
have  been  given  to  Peter  himself  except  just  so  far 


120  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

as  he  received  it  in  common  with  the  other  apostlt  s; 
and  which  being  claimed  for  him  separately  from  the 
rest,  it  would  follow  that  the  divine  assistance  prom- 
ised to  them  was  to  be  communicated  only  through 
him,  although  it  is  clear  from  the  passages  cited  that 
it  was  promised  to  him  only  in  the  same  manner 
and  in  the  same  terms  as  to  all  the  others.  I  admit 
indeed,  that  a  great  privilege  was  granted  to  Peter 
above  the  rest;  but  I  am  led  to  this  conviction  by 
the  testimony,  not  of  the  Scriptures,  but  of  all  Chris- 
tian antiquity.  By  the  help  of  this  testimony  it 
appears  that  he  is  infallible;  but  on  this  condition, 
that  he  should  use  the  counsel  of  his  brethren,  and 
should  lie  aided  by  the  judgment  of  those  who  are 
his  partners  in  this  supreme  function,  and  should 
speak  in  their  name,  of  whom  he  is  head  and  mouth. 
And  yet  there  is  no  one  but  sees  how  far  tins  privi- 
lege falls  short  of  the  desires  of  those  who,  not  with- 
out abuse  of  their  opponents  that  stand  in  the  old 
paths  of  the  church,  desire  that  the  papal  power, 
great  by  its  divine  origin,  and  since  that,  in  the 
course  of  ages,  enormously  augmented,  should  be 
the  sole  power  in  the  church.'' 

*  In  his  Letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Paris,  dated  October  24, 
1865,  the  pope  claims  for  himself  the  ordinary  power  in  the  partic- 
ular dioceses.  In  the  schema  De  Romano  Pontlfice  it  is  said  that 
he  has  ordinary  and  immediate  jurisdiction  in  the  universal 
church.  Since  this  is  said  without  making  any  distinction  be- 
tween ordinary  or  episcopal  power  and  ordinary  patriarchal  or 
primatial  power,  it  would  seem  to  follow  that  the  pope  is  actually 
ordinary  or  bishop  of  each  several  diocese  of  the  Christian  world. 
According  to  the  author  of  the  book  On  the  Roman  Curia,  who 
lived  at  Rome  for  fifteen  years,  the  pope  is  the  exclusive  ordinary 
of  all  the  missions  under  the  sacred  congregation  de  Propaganda 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENBIOK.       121 

IV.  At  the  opening  of  his  speech,  the  archbishop 
of  Dublin  spoke  in  terms  of  the  highest  praise  of 
an  English  work  by  my  late  brother  archbishop  of 
Baltimore,  on  "The  Primacy  of  the  Apostolic  See;" 
for  which  I  made  due  acknowledgments.  But  in  the 
course  of  his  speech  it  appeared  to  me  that  his  com- 
memoration of  the  dead  was  a  reproach  to  the  liv- 
ing ;  for  he  related  how  that  thirty  }Tears  ago,  more 
or  less,  he  learned  by  the  reading  of  it,  that  the  do- 
ings of  the  Sixth  Council  in  the  condemnation  of 
Honorius  were  nowise  opposed  to  the  notion  of  pa- 
pal infallibility.  The  most  reverend  the  present  arch- 
bishop of  Baltimore  afterwards  made  honorable  men- 
tion of  him,  and  quoted  somewhat  from  his  dog- 
matic theology,  from  which  it  might  appear  that 
there  was  no  difference  between  the  opinion  which 
he  himself  so  stoutly  defends,  and  that  which,  in  my 
letter  to  him,  I  asserted  to  have  been  my  brother's 

Fide,  so  that  there  is  no  difference  between  vicars  apostolic  and 
the  titular  bishops  set  over  those  missions,  except  that  the  latter 
are  ordinary  and  the  former  extraordinary  vicars  of  the  pope.  Die 
Romische  Curie.  Bangen.  Munster,  1854.  Page  2G3.  After  the 
Concordats  have  been  done  away,  which  will  not  be  long  after  the 
infallibility  of  the  pope  is  established,  all  episcopal  sees  will  be 
at  the  disposal  of  the  pope  alone,  ad  nutum ;  and  thenceforth  all 
bishops  will  be  vicars  of  the  pope,  liable  to  be  removed  at  his 
nod— ad  nutum  ejus.  Thus  the  church,  from  which  civil  society 
borrowed  the  form  of  representative  government  to  which  it  owes 
the  rights  it  has  acquired,  will  exhibit  an  example  of  absolutism, 
both  in  doctrine  and  administration,  carried  to  the  highest  pitch. 
A  right  reverend  orator  said,  no  long  time  since,  that  the  papal 
power  is,  in  government,  absolute  indeed,  but  not  arbitrary ;  be- 
cause it  is  always  guided  by  reason — which  evidently  implies  that 
the  pope  is  impeccable.  In  fact,  this  is  necessarily  inferred  from 
his  infallibility ;  for  infallibility  is  a  quality  of  the  intellect,  and 
the  intellect  is  affected  by  the  character. 

Vatican  Council.  (3 


122  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

opinion.  I  have  a  few  things  to  say  of  each  of  these 
bishops. 

I  might  prefer  a  serious  complaint  against  the 
archbishop  of  Baltimore  for  having  presented  in  a 
garbled  and  mutilated  form,  from  this  rostrum,  the 
passage  which  has  lately  so  often  been  brought  be- 
fore the  public.  My  brother's  complete  sentence  is 
as  follows: 

"  On  the  other  hand,  that  way  of  speaking  is  not 
to  be  approved,  according  to  which  the  pope  is  de- 
clared to  be  infallible  of  himself  alone;  for  scarcely 
any  Catholic  theologian  is  known  to  have  claimed 
for  him  as  a  private  teacher  the  privilege  of  iner- 
rancy. Neither  as  pope  is  lie  alone,  since  to  him 
teaching,  the  college  of  bishops  <j;ives  its  adhesion, 
which,  it  is  plain,  has  always  happened." 

Thus  far  the  archbishop  of  Baltimore  quotes. 
The  words  immediately  following  on  these  he  thinks 
best  to  omit,  although,  as  will  at  once  be  manifest, 
they  are  absolutely  necessary  to  the  full  expression 
of  the  writer's  meaning : 

"  But  no  orthodox  writer  would  deny  that  pontifi- 
cal definitions  accepted  by  the  college  of  bishops, 
whether  in  council  or  in  their  sees,  either  by  sub- 
scribing decrees,  or  by  offering  no  objection  to  them, 
have  full  force  and  infallible  authority." 

These  words  leave  no  doubt  of  the  mind  of  the 
writer.  Hereafter  they  should  not  be  omitted  when 
the  previous  sentence  is  quoted,  lest  a  false  impres- 
sion of  his  sentiments  be  conveyed. 

It  is  clear  that  this  is  no  chance  utterance  of  his 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       123 

opinion,  from  what  he  says  in  that  English  work  of 
his  from  the  reading  of  which  his  eminence  the  arch- 
bishop of  Dublin  testified  that  he  had  derived  such 
great  profit.  I  read  from  the  work  itself  belonging 
to  the  library  of  the  English  college  in  this  city.  I 
give  a  closely  literal  Latin  version,  lest  I  weaken  the 
force  of  it  by  being  ambitious  of  elegance : 

[The  extract,  as  it  here  follows,  is  from  the  original  Eng- 
lish.] 

"  The  personal  fallibility  [of  the  pope]  in  his  pri- 
vate capacity,  writing  or  speaking,  is  freely  conceded 
by  the  most  ardent  advocates  of  papal  prerogatives ; 
but  his  official  infallibility  ex  cathedra  is  strongly 
affirmed  by  many  :*  while  some,  as  the  French  As- 
sembly of  1682,  contend  that  his  judgment  may  ad- 
mit of  amendment,  as  long  as  it  is  not  sustained  by 
the  assent  and  adhesion  of  the  great  body  of  bish- 
ops. Practically  there  is  no  room  for  difficulty, 
since  all  solemn  judgments  hitherto  pronounced  by 
the  pontiff  have  received  the  assent  of  his  colleagues ; 
and  in  the  contingency  of  a  new  definition  it  should 
be  presumed  by  the  faithful  at  large  that  it  is'  cor- 
rect, AS  LONG  AS  THE  BODY  OF  BISHOPS  DO  NOT  REMON- 
STRATE OR  OPPOSE  IT."f 

V.  Before  proceeding  to  other  points,  I  feel 
bound  to  say  that  I  do  not  agree  in  all  respects  with 
my  brother's  opinion,  which,  I  am  aware,  is  the  com- 
mon opinion  of  theologians.    The  assent  of  the  church 

[*  In  a  foot-note,  the  writer  here  presses  additional  charges  of 
misquotation,  which  it  seems  unnecessary  to  reproduce  here.  ] 

f  Kenrick.  Primacy  of  the  Apostolic  See,  Philadelphia,  1845, 
p.  357, 


124  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

dispersed,  as  the  phrase  is,  I  consider  to  ha 
negative  rather  than  a  positive  authority.  The 
church,  whether  dispersed  or  assembled  in  Council, 
can  not  assent  to  any  error  that  contradicts  revealed 
truth ;  otherwise,  the  gates  of  hell  might  be  said  to 
have  prevailed  against  it.  Nevertheless  it  has  the 
divine  assistance,  in  those  things  alone  which  were 
taught  by  Christ  to  the  apostles,  all  which  things — 
that  is,  all  revealed  truth — "  all  things  whatsoever 
I  have  told  you" — the  Holy  Spirit  brought  to  their 
recollection  by  illuminating  their  minds  with  his  own 
divine  light  (for  this  is  the  end  to  which  he 
rather  than  by  revealing  new  things.  In  order  that 
the  apostles  and  their  successors  may  bear  testimony 
of  these  things  as  ear-witnesses,  it  is  necessary  that 
they  should  be  unable  to  approve,  even  by  silence,  of 
any  opinion  contradictory  to  them. 

But  when  the  question  is  on  a  new  definition  of 
faith,  I  consider  that  a  Council  which  truly  repre- 
sents the  church  universal  is  of  necessity  required. 
For  it  is  there  alone  that  inquiry  can  be  made,  in 
case  any  doubt  should  arise.  In  certain  matters 
only,  and  in  these  only  under  favorable  circum- 
stances, may  silence  be  taken  for  assent ;  but  not  in 
all  matters,  especially  when  dissent  might  turn  out 
to  be  either  useless  or  perilous.  Take  the  present 
controversy,  for  example.  If  the  pope  had  thought 
fit  to  define  himself  as  infallible  in  the  sense  of  the? 
schema,  there  would  have  been  no  opportunity  given 
for  the  great  investigation  which  we  have  seen  insti- 
tuted, now  that  the  Council  is   convened  and  the 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       125 

bishops  assembled,  affording  light  and  courage  to 
each  other.  Yery  few  of  those  who  have  stood  out 
so  stoutly  against  the  new  definition,  in  the  most 
difficult  circumstances,  would  have  ventured  to  resist 
the  pope,  or,  if  they  had  had  the  courage  for  that, 
would  have  known  where  to  lay  their  hands  on 
weapons  fit  and  effective  for  the  protection  of  their 
rights,  so  gravely  imperilled. 

A  signal  instance  in  proof  that  the  silence  of  the 
church  is  not,  at  least  in  all  cases,  to  be  taken  for 
consent,  is  supplied  by  the  history  of  the  opinion 
concerning  the  power  of  the  Roman  pontiff  against 
realms  not  subject  to  his  government.  For  four  cen- 
turies after  the  bull  Unam  Sandam*  this  opinion 
prevailed.  I  am  not  aware  that  any  document  is 
extant  which  shows  that  there  was  any  remonstrance 
against  it  except  on  the  part  of  persons  who  suffered 
some  damage  from  it ;  and  these  must  be  considered 
as  having  demurred  not  so  much  to  the  power  as  to 
the  exercise  of  it  to  their  injur}r.  From  the  fulmina- 
tion  of  the  bull  of  Boniface  VIII.,  down  to  the 
beginning  of  the  seventeenth  century — for  four  whole 
centuries — this  definition  of  the  papal  power  seems 
to  have  been  in  force,  and  was  said  even  by  the  most 
learned  theologians  of  the  seventeenth  century  to  be 
matter  of  faith.  I  once  used  to  think  that  the  lan- 
guage of  the  bull  Unam  Sandam  was  capable  of 
being  reconciled  with  the  view  I  then  held  of  papal 
infallibility.  But  I  do  not  now  think  so.  It  used  to 
seem  to  me  a  special  act  of  divine  providence  which 

[*  Fulminated  a.  d.  1302.] 


12G  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

had  kept  the  pope  from  declaring  all  mankind  to  be 
subject  to  him  in  temporals,  by  reason  of  sin  ;  but  on 
more  mature  reflection  I  saw  that  this  explanation 
was  a  mere  subterfuge,  utterly  unworthy  of  an 
honest  man.  "Words  derive  their  meaning  from 
the  intent  of  the  speaker  and  the  acceptation  of  the 
hearers.  No  man  can  deny  that  the  purpose  of 
Boniface  in  that  bull  was  to  claim  for  himself  tem- 
poral power,  and  to  propound  this  opinion  to  the 
faithful,  to  be  held  under  pain  of  damnation.  No 
man  can  deny  that  the  words  of  the  bull  were 
received  in  this  sense  by  all  then  living.  If  it  was 
withstood  by  the  subjects  of  Philip  the  Fair,  these 
were  extremely  few  in  number  compared  to  the  whole 
of  Christendom,  for  it  was  only  a  little  part  of  modern 
France  that  was  under  his  sceptre,  and  these  few 
may  be  considered  as  having  opposed  rather  the 
exercise  of  the  power  than  its  divine  right.  The 
church,  then,  through  all  that  period  seems  to  have 
approved  by  its  assent  the  bull  Unara  Sanctum, 
hardly  a  single  bishop  having  objected  to  it. 

But  at  the  present  time  the  opinion  so  solemnly 
enunciated  in  that  bull  is  repudiated  by  all,  not 
excepting  even  the  most  ardent  -advocates  of  papal 
infallibility.  I  summon  certainly  a  most  unimpeach- 
able witness  in  this  case,  namely,  his  grace  the  most 
reverend  Martin  John  Spalding,  archbishop  of  Balti- 
more, who,  in  a  work  (of  which  I  shall  have  more 
particular  occasion  to  speak  hereafter)  printed  at 
Baltimore  in  1866,  after  three  other  editions  of  the 
same  had  been  exhausted  and  this  fourth  edition 


SPEECH    OF  ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       127 

bad  been  issued  to  meet  tbe  demand  of  tbe  faithful, 
speaks  as  follows : 

"But  tbe  papacy  invested  itself  with  temporal 
power  ;  and  in  the  middle  ages  it  claimed  tbe  right 
to  depose  princes,  and  to  absolve  their  subjects  from 
the  oath  of  allegiance.  Be  it  so  ;  what  then  ?  Was 
this  accession  of  temporal  power  ever  viewed  as  an 
essential  prerogative  of  the  papacy?  Or  was  it  not 
considered  merely  as  an  accidental  appendage,  the 
creature  of  peculiar  circumstances?  Are  there  any 
examples  of  such  alleged  usurpations  during  the  first 
ten  centuries  of  its  history?  Has  this  power  been 
exercised,  or  even  claimed,  by  the  Koman  pontiffs 
for  the  last  three  centuries  ?  If  these  two  facts  are 
undoubted — as  they  certainly  are — then  how  main- 
tain that  a  belief  in  the  papacy  involves  a  recognition 
of  its  temporal  power  ?  The  latter  was  never,  cer- 
tainly, a  doctrine  of  the  church.  If  it  was,  where  is 
the  proof  ? — where  the  church  definition  that  made 
it  a  doctrine?"  Five  leading  Catholic  universities 
(Sorbonne,  Louvain,  Douay,  Alcala,  and  Salamanca) 
when  officially  called  on  by  Mr.  Pitt,  prime  minister 
of  Great  Britain,  (1788,)  solemnly  and  unanimously 
disclaimed  this  opinion  and  maintained  the  contrary. 
Did  the  Catholic  church,  did  the  popes,  ever  rebuke 
them  for  the  disclaimer  ?     Do  not  Catholics  all  over 

*  Here  the  author  is  certainly  mistaken.  It  does  not  require 
a  definition  to  constitute  a  doctrine.  It  is  enough  that  there 
should  be  truth  divinely  revealed,  and  propounded  as  such  to  the 
faithful  by  the  ordinary  magistery  of  the  church.  But  that  power 
was  propounded  as  a  doctrine  by  Boniface  VIII.,  when  he  declared 
that  it  must  be  held  by  all  "sub  salutis  dispendio."  Furthermore, 
Suarez  has  it  for  a  defined  doctrine. 


128  THE    VATICAN  .COUNCIL. 

the  world  now  almost  unanimously  disclaim  it  ?  arid 
are  they  the  less  Catholic  for  this?  I  fearlessly 
assert — and  I  do  so  advisedly — that  there  are  xw\ 
few  Catholics  at  the  present  day  who  do  not  reject 
this  opinion;  that  there  are  still  fewer  who  maintain 
it;  and  that  it  is  not  defended,  at  least  publicly,'"' 
even  in  Rome  itself.!- " 

The  tacit  assent  of  the  bishops,  therefore,  for  no 
less  than  four  centuries,  did  not  have  the  effect  to 
constitute  the  opinion  of  the  power  of  the  popes  in 
temporals  into  a  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  faith,  which 
is  obvious  of  itself,  since  otherwise  the  rejection  of  it 
now  would  be  equivalent  to  defection  from  the  unity 
of  the  Catholic  church. 

In  this  opinion  two  things  are  to  be  distinguished : 
the  power  itself,  and  the  reason  of  the  power.  The 
power  itself  lmd  its  ground  in  circumstances;  and 
for  the  most  part  it  tended  to  the  public  good.  The 
reason  of  the  power  was  not,  as  the  popes  asserted, 
divine  authority,  divinely  granted  to  them  as  holding 
the  primacy  in  the  church ;  but  it  originated  in  cir- 
cumstances, by  the  consent  of  Christendom.  It  was 
recognized  by  public  law,  and  was,  so  far,  legitimate. 
It  was  vested  in  the  popes,  not  because  as  popes 
they  had  received  it  from  Christ,  but  because  there 
was  no  one  else  who  could  exercise  it  at  that  time, 
when  the  need  for  it  arose.  In  ascribing  it  to  the 
ordinance  of  God,  the  popes  were  laboring  under 

*  The  expression  is  too  incautious. 

f  Lectures  on  the  Evidences  of  Catholicity.  By  ft£  J.  Spald- 
ing, D.  D. ,  Archbishop  of  Baltimore.  Fourth  edition,  1866,  pp. 
377,  378. 


SPEECH    OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENBJCK.       129 

something  of  human  infirmity — a  fact  with  which  it 
would  be  unjust  to  reproach  them.  That  it  has  now 
fallen  into  desuetude  is  admitted  by  all.  Few  per- 
sons think  of  it  as  a  thing  possible  to  be  revived  ; 
although  this  may  not  be  impossible,  if  the  pope  is 
to  be  held  infallible,  and  if  we  may  put  confidence  in 
the  words  of  the  most  reverend  archbishop  of  West- 
minster, in  a  speech  delivered  by  him  at  London  some 
years  ago,  before  his  promotion  to  the  episcopate. 

This  distinguished  man  asserted  in  that  speech — 
if  I  remember  correctly  what  I  read  in  the  newspa- 
pers, and  I  certainly  am  not  mistaken  as  to  the 
substance  of  it — that  the  pope,  as  Christ's  vicege- 
rent, ought  to  be  a  king ;  and  that  the  fact  of  his 
having  been  for  centuries  without  secular  dominion 
was  no  argument  against  this  assertion,  for  he  had 
always  possessed  the  right  to  it.  If  this  is  true, 
(which  I  vehemently  deny)  it  follows  that  the  pope 
possesses  not  only  the  petty  domain  of  his  Roman 
territory,  but  a  sort  of  universal  right  over  the  whole 
world.  Since  Christ  is  king  of  kings,  the  pope,  who 
as  his  representative  ought  to  be  a  king  (according 
to  the  archbishop  of  Westminster,*)  ought  to  repre- 

[*  The  opinions  of  Abp.  Manning,  as  the  representative  and 
leader  of  the  now  victorious  party  in  the  Roman  Catholic  church, 
are  of  some  interest  to  American  citizens.  A  more  recent  utter- 
ance of  his  is  quoted  by  Quirinus  (p.  832)  from  a  sermon  of  his  in 
1869.  Speaking  in  the  pope's  name,  he  says  :  "I  claim  to  be  the 
supreme  judge  and  director  of  the  consciences  of  men  ;  of  the 
peasant  that  tills  the  field,  and  the  prince  that  sits  on  the  throne  ; 
of  the  household  that  lives  in  the  shade  of  privacy,  and  the  legis- 
lature that  makes  laws  for  kingdoms— I  am  the  sole  last  supreme 
judge  of  what  is  right  and  wrong."] 

5* 


130  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

sent  him  throughout  the  whole  realm  of  Christ  him- 
self :  that  is,  throughout  the  entire  world.  We  know 
what  a  happy  talent  for  drawing  inferences,  even  out 
of  figures  of  speech,  is  shown  by  the  advocates  of 
papal  authority.  What  if  they  have  for  a  premise 
so  pregnant  a  principle  as  this  of  the  archbishop  of 
Westminster  ?  It  can  be  no  more  of  an  objection  to 
this  right  that  for  a  number  of  centuries  it  was  never 
claimed,  than  that  for  many  centuries  from  the  be- 
ginning it  was  not  possessed,  and  even  that  no  one 
dreamed  of  its  belonging  to  the  pope.  I  rein-  to  this 
not  to  excite  prejudice  Against  this  eminent  man,  but 
in  order  to  show  him  that  the  consequence  which 
necessarily  follows  from  a  principle  evidently  errone- 
ous, the  falsity  of  which  I  shall  try  to  prove  in  the 
course  of  this  speech — a  consequence  which  he  him- 
self would  reject — ought  to  make  him  cautious  not  to 
know  more  than  it  is  worth  while  to  know  about 
papal  infallibility. 

For  these  reasons  I  am  compelled  to  differ  from 
what  is  at  least  a  common  way  of  speaking,  when 
the  question  rises  about  denning  some  new  dogma  of 
the  Catholic  faith.  It  is  my  opinion  that  this  can 
not  be  done  without  a  Council  truly  representing  the 
church  universal. 

I  now  return  to  the  subject,  with  which,  after  all, 
what  I  have  said  is  by  no  means  disconnected. 

VI.  There  is  no  great  difference,  if  perchance 
there  is  any,  between  my  brother's  opinion  and  that 
expressed  by  the  most  reverend  Martin  John  Spal- 
ding, archbishop  of  Baltimore,  in  his  History  of  the 


SPEECH  OF  ARCHBISHOP  KENHICK.   131 

Reformation  ;  from  the  fifth  edition  of  which,  revised 
by  the  author  and  published  at  Baltimore  in  1866,  I 
quote  the  following,  which  I  translate  into  Latin  with 
the  same  fidelity  as  I  did  my  brother's  language.  I 
premise  that  it  had  first  appeared  twenty-six  years 
before,  and  that  it  was  originally  written  in  reply  to 
the  History  of  the  Reformation  by  D'Aubigne.  This 
book  is  to  be  found  in  the  hands  of  almost  all  the 
Catholics  in  the  United  States,  not  only  on  account 
of  the  amount  of  information  which  it  contains  and 
the  familiar  style  in  which  it  is  written,  but  also  on 
account  of  the  high  esteem  in  which  the  author  is 
held  among  us,  as  the  occupant  of  the  primatial 
see,  and  as  a  man  of  wide  celebrity  for  learning  and 
genius.  This  fifth  edition  appeared  in  the  same  year 
in  which  he  drew  up,  in  the  name  of  the  Council  of 
Baltimore,  a  letter  to  the  pope,  from  which  both  he 
and  others  would  have  it  inferred  that  the  bishops  of 
the  United  States  favor  the  designs  of  the  infallibil- 
ists.  *  It  is  contained  in  the  library  of  the  American 
College  in  this  city,  having  been  presented  by  the 
author,  with  his  name  in  it  in  his  own  handwriting, 
in  1867,  when  he  was  at  Rome ;  on  which  occasion 
he,  with  the  other  bishops,  signed  a  letter  to  the 
pope,  surely  with  no  intention  of  settling  or  enunci- 
ating a  doctrine,  but  only  of  manifesting  their  own 
veneration  and  affection  towards  the  pope.  The 
archbishop  of  Baltimore's  words  are  as  follows : 

"  In  what,  in  fact,  consists  the  difference  between 
the  authoritative  teaching  of  the  first  body  of  Christ's 
ministers,  the  apostles,  and  that  body  of  pastors  who 


132  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

by  divine  commission  succeeded  them  in  the  office  of 
preaching,  teaching,  and  baptizing,  and  who  hi  the 
discharge  of  these  sacred  duties  were  promised  the 
divine  assistance  all  days,  even  to  the  consummation 
of  the  world?  And  if  the  latter  was  opposed  to 
rational  liberty,  why  was  not  the  former  ?  Besides, 
we  learn,  for  the  first  time,  that  the  Eoman  Chan- 
cery* decided  on  articles  of  faith.     AVe  had  always 

thought  that   this   was    THE    EXCLUSIVE    PROVINCE    OF 

General  Councils,  and  when  they  were  not  in  ses- 
sion, of  the  Eoman  pontiffs  with  the  CONSENT  OB 
ACQUIESCENCE  of  the  body  of  bishops  dibpbbbed  over 
thi:  would.  We  had  also  in  our  simplicity  believed 
that  even  these  did  not  always  decide  on  contro- 
verted points,  but  only  in  cases  in  which  the  teaching 
of  revelation  was  clear  and  explicit;  and  that  in 
other  matters  they  wisely  allowed  a  reasonable  lati- 
tude of  opinion.  But  D'Aubigne  has  taught  us 
better !  He  would  have  us  to  believe  that  Eoman 
Catholics  are  bound  hand  and  foot,  body  and  soul, 
and  that  they  are  not  allowed  even  to  reflect."!' 

It  remains  to  say  a  few  words  of  my  brother's 

*  Perhaps  D'Aubigne  wrote  Curia  and  the  mistake  occurred 
in  the  translation.     [Abp.  Kenrick's  note.] 

t  History  of  the  Reformation  by  Martin  John  Spalding,  Arch- 
bishop of  Baltimore.  Fifth  revised  edition.  Baltimore,  1866. 
Vol.  I.,  page  318.  [The  quotation  as  above  given  is  from  the 
original  English.  Early  in  the  Council  a  misfortune  befell  Abp, 
Manning,  in  all  respects  similar  to  this  of  Abp.  Spalding.  The 
following  extract  was  produced  from  a  catechism  widely  used  and 
authorized  in  England,  and  praised  by  Manning's  own  journal, 
Tlie  Tabid :  "  Q.  Are  not  Catholics  bound  to  believe  that  the  pope 
is  in  himself  infallible  ?  A.  This  is  a  Peotestant  invention,  and 
i-;  no  article  of  Catholic  belief."     Quirinus.  07.] 


SPEECH    OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       133 

views  about  the  case  of  Honorius.  It  is  no  wonder 
that,  educated  at  the  College  of  Urban,  and  being 
full  of  zeal  for  the  Holy  See,  he  should  have  judged 
him  very  mildly.  For  the  case  was  not  of  any  such 
importance  before  the  rise  of  the  present  controversy, 
and  therefore  had  not  been  so  thoroughly  cleared  up 
as  it  now  is.  I  take  this  opportunity  to  say  a  word 
of  the  bishop  of  Eottenburg's  *  opinion  expressed  in 
his  profoundly  learned  History  of  Councils.  The 
archbishop  of  Dublin,  who  has  perhaps  acquired  his 
information  from  the  French  translation  instead  of 
from  the  work  itself,"  says  that  there  will  be  some 
difficulty  in  reconciling  this  opinion  with  that  which 
the  bishop  of  Kottenburg  now  advocates.  A  year 
ago  I  read  the  original  work,  and  it  was  from  that 
that  I  first  learned — what  my  own  examination  has 
since  confirmed — that  the  letters  of  Honorius  to 
Sergius  do  contain  some  things  which,  cannot  be 
reconciled  with  sound  doctrine. 

VII.  It  was  with  great  delight  that  I  listened  to 
the  recent  speech  of  the  archbishop  of  Westminster 
in  this  assembly.  I  was  at  a  loss  which  most  to 
admire,  the  eloquence  of  the  man,  or  his  fiery  zeal 
in  moving,  or  rather  commanding  us  to  enact  the 
new  definition.  The  lucid  arrangement  of  topics, 
the  absolute  felicity  of  diction,  the  singular  grace  of 
elocution,  and  the  supreme  authority  and  candor  of 
mind  which  were  resplendent  in  his  speech,  almost 
extorted  from  me  the  exclamation,  "  Talis  cum  sis, 
ittinam  noster  esses!"     And  yet,  while  I  listened,  I 

[*  Bishop  HofVlo.] 


134  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

could  not  help  thinking  of  what  used  to  be  said  of 
the  English  settlers  in  Ireland — that  they  were  more 
Irish  than  the  Irishmen.  The  most  reverend  arch- 
bishop is  certainly  more  Catholic  than  any  Catholic 
I  ever  knew  before.  He  has  no  doubt  himself  of  the 
infallibility — personal,  separate,  and  absolute — of  the 
pope,  and  he  is  not  willing  to  allow  other  people  to 
have  any.  He  declares  it  to  be  a  doctrine  of  faith, 
and  he  does  not  so  much  demand  as  he  does  pre- 
dict, that  the  Vatican  Council  shall  define  it  as  such  ; 
something  perhaps  in  the  style  of  those  prophets  who 
go  to  work  to  bring  about  the  fulfilment  of  their  own 
predictions.  As  for  myself — whom  the  experience 
of  well  nigh  sixty  years,  since  I  first  began  to  study 
the  rudiments  of  the  faith,  may  perhaps  have  made 
as  well  informed  upon  this  subject  as  one  who  has 
been  numbered  with  the  church  for  some  twenty 
years — I  boldly  declare  that  that  opinion,  as  it  lies 
in  the  schema  is  not  a  doctrine  of  faith,  and  that  it 
cannot  become  such  by  any  definition  whatsoever, 
even  by  the  definition  of  a  Council.  "We  are  the 
keepers  of  the  faith  committed  to  us,  not  its  mas- 
ters. We  are  teachers  of  the  faithful  intrusted  to 
our  charge,  in  just  so  far  as  we  are  witnesses. 

The  great  confusion  of  ideas  which  prevails 
throughout  this  controversy  seems  to  me  to  arise 
from  an  inaccurate  notion  of  certain  terms,  and  from 
the  neglect  of  the  distinction,  which  should  never  be 
lost  sight  of,  between  theology  as  a  science,  and  the 
revealed  truths  of  which  it  treats,  as  an  object  of  our 
faith.     Let  me  briefly  explain  my  meaning. 


SPEECH    OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.      135 

All  truths  divinely  revealed  are  to  be  believed 
with  divine  faith,  which  are  propounded  as  such  to 
the  faithful  by  the  church,  whether  in  councils  or 
through  its  ordinary  government.  Among  these 
truths  some  are  explicitly  revealed,  others  implicitly. 
These  last  are  to  be  restricted  to  those  truths  only 
which  are  necessarily  connected  with  truths  expli- 
citly revealed,  so  that  one  who  should  deny  the  for- 
mer would  be  held  to  have  denied  the  latter  also. 
Thus  the  church  in  its  acts  of  definition  is  always  a 
witness,  and  formulates  a  judgment  only  by  witness- 
ing. It  condemns  errors  which  openly  contradict 
doctrines  explicitly  revealed,  and  besides  these, 
errors  opposed  to  corollaries  necessarily  deduced 
from  such  doctrines.  It  is  the  general  opinion  of 
theologians  that  it  may  happen  that  arguments  of 
doubtful  value  shall  be  adduced  in  proof  of  truths  of 
faith,  even  in  General  Councils ;  although  in  declar- 
ing the  faith  itself,  the  Councils  cannot  err.  The 
reason  is,  that  in  declaring  the  faith — an  act  of  which 
all  bishops,  learned  and  unlearned  alike,  are  capa- 
ble— the  church  acts  as  witness :  in  proving  the  faith, 
whether  from  reason  or  from  Scripture,  she  sustains 
the  part  not  so  much  of  a  witness  as  of  a  theologian. 

It  is  within  the  limits  above  enunciated  that  that 
faith  divinely  revealed  is  contained,  concerning  which 
the  church  as  witness  is  capable  of  pronouncing  a 
formal  judgment,  and  of  anathematizing  gainsayers 
as  heretics.  Among  these  truths  explicitly  or  im- 
plicitly revealed,  those  which  have  been  denned  by 
a  solemn  judgment  of  the  church  are  said  to  belong 


13G  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

to  the  Catholic  faith,  in  distinction  from  those  which, 
although  revealed,  and  necessary  to  be  believed,  have 
not  been  enunciated  or  denned  by  decree  of  Coun- 
cil.    But  this  distinction  is  merely  scholastic,  and 

implies  no  difference  at  all  between  the  two  kinds  of 
truth,  so  far  as  respects  the  obligation  of  believing 
them. 

Theology  as  a  science  is  to  be  carefully  distin- 
guished from  faith  or  the  body  of  credenda.  It  sets 
forth  the  truths  of  faith  in  systematic  order,  and 
proves  them,  in  its  way  of  proving,  either  positively 
or  scholastically,  and  deduces  sundry  conclusions 
from  truths  explicitly  or  implicitly  revealed,  which, 
for  distinction's  Bake,  are  called  theological  conclu- 
sions. These  conclusions,  not  being  immediately  and 
necessarily  connected  with  revealed  truths,  so  that 
the  denial  of  them  would  be  deemed  a  denial  of 
those  truths  themselves,  cannot  be  elevated  to  the 
rank  of  truths  of  faith,  or  propounded  as  such  to  the 
faithful  at  cost  of  their  everlasting  salvation.  Prop- 
ositions contradictory  of  them  may  be  condemned 
as  erroneous,  but  not  as  heretical. 

In  the  Vatican  Council,  this  distinction  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  observed.  The  result — a  thing 
unknown  hitherto  in  Councils — has  been  that  the 
bishops  are  divided  among  diverse  opinions,  dispu- 
ting, certainly  not  about  doctrines  of  faith  of  which 
they  are  witnesses  and  custodians,  but  about  opin- 
ions of  the  schools.  The  Council-chamber  has  been 
turned  into  a  theojogical  arena,  the  partisans  of  op- 
posite opinions,  not  only  on  this  question  of  the  infal- 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.      137 

libility  of  the  pope,  but  on  other  subjects,  exchanging 
blows  back  and  forth  with  the  hot  temper  which  is 
more  common  in  theologians  than  in  bishops,  and  is 
not  becoming  to  either;*  for  all  acknowledge  the 
Roman  pontiff,  united  with  the  body  of  bishops,  to 
be  infallible.  Here  we  have  a  doctrine  of  faith. 
But  not  all  acknowledge  him  to  be  infallible  by  him- 
self alone;  neither  do  all  know  what  is  meant  by 
that  formula  ;  for  different  parties  offer  different  in- 
terpretations of  it.  Here  we  Lave  the  opinions  or 
views  of  the  schools,  about  which  (as  is  fair  enough) 
there  are  all  sorts  of  mutual  contradictions. 

It  may  be  objected  that  by  this  line  of  argument 
I  assail  the  definition  of  the  immaculate  conception 
of  the  blessed  Virgin  by  the  bull  Incffabilis  Dens; 
since  this  opinion  was  for  centuries  freely  denied  by 
many,  and  was  afterwards  erected  into  an  article  of 
faith  by  the  bull  aforesaid,  with  the  consent  and  ap- 
plause of  the  body  of  bishops,  as  appeal's  from  their 
acts  and  writings,  many  of  them  having  been  present 
at  the  pontifical  definition.  Speaking  for  myself 
alone,  I  give  the  following  frank  reply,  which  per- 
haps will  meet  the  approval  neither  of  my  friends  nor 
of  others.  For  a  fuller  reply,  I  refer  to  my  Obser- 
vations, in  the  Synopsis,*!*  the  sum  of  which  is  as 

[*  Compare  with  this  expression  Archbishop  Manning's  solemn 
declaration  as  to  what  did  not  occur— "  scenes  of  indecent  clamor 
and  personal  violence,  unworthy  even  in  laymen,  criminal  in  bishops 
of  the  church."  Petri  Privilcgium,  3.  28.  The  coincidence  of  expres- 
sion is  curious,  one  bishop  giving  the  facts  as  they  happened,  and 
the  other  the  facts  as  they  did  not  happen.] 

f  Synopsis  Observationnm,  pp.  234-238. 


138  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

follows :  I  admit  that  the  blessed  Virgin  Mary  through 
the  singular  favor  of  God,  and  in  view  of  the  merits 
of  her  Son  Jesus  Christ,  was  kept  in  her  conception 
from  all  guilt  of  Adam's  sin.  I  do  not  deny  that 
tins  sentiment  belongs  to  the  deposit  of  faith;  never- 
theless, I  have  never  been  able  to  discover  it  therein, 
so  far  as  that  deposit  is  set  forth  in  the  Scriptures 
and  the  writings  of  the  fathers;  neither  have  I  ever 
found  the  man  who  could  show  it  to  me  there.  The 
assent  of  "  the  Church  Dispersed "  (as  it  is  called) 
proves  that  the  definition  to  which  that  assent  is 
given  is  not  in  contradiction  to  any  revealed  truth; 
since,  as  I  have  thready  remarked,  the  church,  wheth- 
er in  council  or  dispersed,  can  tolerate  nothing  which 
contradicts  the  faith.  The  pious  opinion  was  always 
cherished  among  the  faithful — an  affection  which  the 
church  encouraged,  and  by  the  institution  of  the  Feast 
of  the  Conception,  almost  sanctioned.  But  it  never 
delivered  it  as  a  doctrine  of  faith,  and  popes  have 
strictly  forbidden  that  the  opposite  opinion  should 
be  branded  with  the  mark  of  heresy  by  its  opponents. 
If  any  one  should  deny  that  it  is  a  doctrine  of  faith, 
I  do  not  see  what  answer  could  be  made  to  him; 
for  he  would  reply  that  the  church  could  not  so  long 
have  tolerated  an  error  contrary  to  truth  divinely 
revealed,  without  seeming  either  ignorant  of  what 
the  deposit  of  faith  contained  or  tolerant  of  mani- 
fest error. 

YIII.  I  now  proceed  to  show  that  the  opinion  of 
the  infallibility  of  the  pope  in  the  sense  of  the  schema, 
whether  true  or  false,  is  not  a  doctrine  of  faith,  and 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       139 

cannot  be  propounded  as  such  to  tlie  faithful,  even 
by  the  definition  of  a  Council. 

Definitions  of  faith  are  not  incitements  to  devo- 
tion, much  less  are  they  the  triumphal  exaltation  of 
the  opinions  of  schools  of  theology,  according  as  one 
or  another  of  these  gets  the  upper  hand.  They  are 
authoritative  expositions  of  the  doctrines  of  faith, 
generally  designed  to  guard  against  the  subterfuges 
of  innovators,  and  they  never  impose  upon  believers 
a  new  faith. 

This  being  settled,  I  say  that  the  infallibility  of 
the  pope  is  not  a  doctrine  of  faith. 

1.  It  is  not  contained  in  the  symbols  of  the  faith ; 
it  is  not  presented  as  an  article  of  faith  in  the  cate- 
chisms ;  and  it  is  not  found  as  such  in  any  document 
of  public  worship.  Therefore  the  church  has  not 
hitherto  taught  it  as  a  thing  to  be  believed  of  faith ; 
as,  if  it  were  a  doctrine  of  faith,  it  ought  to  have 
delivered  and  taught  it. 

2.  Not  only  has  not  the  church  taught  it  in  any 
public  instrument,  but  it  has  suffered  it  to  be  im- 
pugned, not  everywhere,  but,  with  the  possible  excep- 
tion of  Italy,  almost  everywhere  in  the  world,  and 
that  for  a  long  time.  This  is  proved  by  a  witness 
above  all  impeachment — the  approbation  of  Inno- 
cent XI.  twice  conferred  upon  Bossuet's  Exposition 
of  the  Faith,  a  work  in  which  not  only  no  mention 
of  this  doctrine  occurs,  but  in  which  the  notion  is 
plainly  referred  to  in  the  remarks  upon  matters  in 
dispute  among  theologians,  on  which  opinion  is  free. 

To  speak  only  of  the  English-speaking  nations,  it 


140  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

may  be  observed  that  in  no  one  of  their  symbolical 
or  catechetical  works  is  this  opinion  found  set  down 
among  truths  of  faith. 

The  whole  supply  of  books  treating  of  faith  and 
piety,  down  to  the  beginning  of  the  present  century, 
and  later,  has  been  imported  into  Ireland  and  the 
United  States  from  England.  In  many  of  them  the 
opposite  opinion  is  given.  In  none  of  them  is  the 
opinion  itself  found  as  a  matter  of  faith.  A  year 
ago,  indeed,  in  England  and  the  United  States,  there 
came  out  sundry  books — two  or  three  of  them  to  my 
knowledge — intended  to  prepare  men's  minds  to 
receive  the  opinion  as  belonging  to  the  faith.  As  for 
that  one  which  was  published  in  the  United  States, 
and  afterwards  translated  into  French  and  German,* 
written  by  a  pious  and  extremely  zealous  but  igno- 
rant man,  I  may  say  that  it  abounded  in  such  grave 
blunders,  at  least  in  the  first  edition  in  English,  as 
to  excite  more  laughter  than  indignation  in  others 
beside  me,  holding  different  opinions  on  the  pending 
question.  When  I  was  solicited  by  the  author  to 
give  some  sort  of  commendation  to  the  little  book, 
which  is  measurably  damaging  to  the  bishops,  I  did 
not  wish  to  trouble  the  good  man  with  a  debate,  and 
so,  in  an  unguarded  moment,  I  promised  him  the 
charity  of  silence. 

It  was  known,  indeed,  among  us  that  the  school 
of  theologians  commonly  called  by  us  Ultramontanes, 
upheld  the  opinion  of  papal  infallibility  in  a  sense 

[*  The  writer  here  refers  to  a  work  on  The  Infallibility  of  the 
Pope  by  the  Rev.  Father  YVeninger,  S.  J. ,  of  Cincinnati. ] 


SPEECH   OF  ARCHBISHOP  KENKICK.       141 

more  favorable  to  papal  privileges  than  the  other 
theologians.  And  that  opinion,  after  the  translation 
into  English  of  the  distinguished  Joseph  De  Mais- 
tre's  work  on  The  Pope,  widely  prevailed  among 
among  clergy  and  laity,  and  still  prevails,  yet  not  as 
a  doctrine  of  faith,  but  as  a  free  opinion  which  seems 
to  have  in  its  favor  important  reasons  and  weighty 
names.     But  to  return  to  the  point. 

For  almost  two  centuries  there  has  been  in  use 
among  English-speaking  Catholics  a  little  book  en- 
titled, "Roman-catholic  Principles  in  Reference  to  God 
and  the  King."  So  widely  circulated  is  this  little 
book,  that  from  1748  to  1813  were  printed  thirty-five 
editions  of  it,  in  a  separate  form ;  besides  that,  being 
very  brief,  it  was  often  appended  to  other  works. 
The  Very  Reverend  Vicar  Apostolic  Coppinger,  in 
England,  at  the  opening  of  the  present  century,  had 
it  printed  twelve  times  over ;  and  another  vicar  apos- 
tolic, Walmesley,  a  man  of  the  highest  erudition,  left 
his  written  opinion  of  this  book,  commending  it  to 
his  friends  for  its  clearness  and  good  judgment.  On 
the  present  question  it  speaks  as  follows : 

"  It  is  no  matter  of  faith  to  believe  that  the  pope 
is  in  himself  infallible,  separated  from  the  church, 
even  in  expounding  the  faith.  By  consequence 
papal  definitions  or  decrees,  in  whatever  .form  pro- 
nounced, taken  exclusively  from  a  General  Council 
or  universal  acceptance  of  the  church,  oblige  none, 
under  pain  of  heresy,  to  an  interior  assent."* 

*  Roman-catholic  Principles,  etc.    Kirk's  edition,  Butler's  His- 
torical Memoirs,  vol.  4,  Appendix,  p.  501. 


112  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

The  work  is  printed  in  full  in  the  Appendix  to 
Charles  Butler's  Historical  Memoirs,  which  may  be 
found  in  the  library  of  the  English  college  in  this 
city. 

We  have  with  us  a  witness  from  the  United 
States  of  North  America,  in  the  person  of  the  most 
reverend  archbishop  of  Baltimore,  who  lias  expressed 
his  opinion  on  this  point,  not  in  the  historical  work 
from  which  I  have  quoted,  which,  as  likely  to  meet 
the  eye  of  other  than  Catholic  readers,  might  seem, 
perhaps,  to  permit  a  more  liberal  explanation  of  the 
subject;  but  in  a  lecture  delivered  to  the  faithful  in 
his  own  cathedra]  church,  while  he  was  bishop  of 
Louisville,  To  the  great  benefit  of  the  church,  he 
collected  the  lectures  into  a  volume,  and  published 
them.  The  volume  has  been  often  reprinted,  and  a 
copy  of  the  fourth  edition,  printed  at  Baltimore  hi 
1866,  is  preserved  in  the  library  of  the  American  col- 
lege in  this  city,  having  been  ppesented  to  the  library 
by  the  author,  with  an  inscription  in  his  own  hand- 
writing, in  the  year  1867,  when  he  was  here. 

He  delivers  many  admirable  arguments  on  the 
infallibility  of  the  church ;  then,  refuting  the  objec- 
tions commonly  made  against  it,  he  sa 

"  Do  we  mean  to  say  that  even  the  pope  is  im- 
peccable or  mfalhble  in  his  private  and  individual 
capacity?  No  Catholic  divine  ever  so  much  as 
dreamed  of  saying  or  thinking  so.  Do  we  mean  to 
say  that  the  pope,  viewed  in  his  public  and  official 
capacity,  when  he  speaks  out  as  the  organ  and  vis- 
ible head  of  the  church,  is  gifted  with  infallibility  ? 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENEICK.       143 

No  Catholic  divine  ever  defended  his  infallibility, 
even  under  suck  circumstances,  unless  when  the 
matters  on  which  he  uttered  his  definitions  were  inti- 
mately connected  with  the  doctrines  of  faith  and 
morals,  and  when,  if  he  should  be  permitted  by  God 
to  fall  into  error,  there  would  be  danger  of  the  whole 
church  being  also  led  astray.  Those  numerous  and 
learned  Catholic  theologians  who  maintain  the  infal- 
libility of  the  Koman  pontiff  in  this  particular  case, 
consider  it  as  if  matter  of  opinion  more  or  less  cer- 
.tain,  not  as  one  of  Catholic  faith,  [the  Italics  are  by 
the  archbishop  himself,]  defined  by  the  church  and 
obligatory  on  all.  Though  not  an  article  of  Catholic 
faith,  it  is,  however,  the  general  belief  among  Cath- 
olics ;  and  I  myself  am  inclined  strongly  to  advocate 
its  soundness,  chiefly  on  account  of  the  intimate  con- 
nection between  the  pontiff  and  the  church,  as  will 
be  shown  in  a  subsequent  lecture.  Still,  it  is  an 
opinion,  for  all  this,  and  no  Catholic  would  venture 
to  charge  the  great  Bossuet,  for  example,  with  being 
wanting  in  orthodoxy  for  denying  it,  while  he  so 
powerfully  and  so  eloquently  established  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Church."* 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  remark  that  the  scho- 
lastic distinction  between  " doctrines  of  the  faith"  and 
"  doctrines  or  dogmas  of  the  Catholic  faith,"  cannot 
be  brought  in  to  break  the  force  of  the  conclusion, 
derived  from  sources  so  numerous  and  so  important, 

*  Lectures  on  the  Evidences  of  Catholicity,  delivered  in  the 
Cathedral  of  Louisville,  by  M.  J.  Spalding,  D.  D. ,  Archbishop  of 
Baltimore.  Fourth  edition,  revised  and  enlarged.  Baltimore, 
18GG.     Pp.  2G3-4. 


144  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

that  the  opinion  of  the  infallibility  of  the  pope  lias 
not  been  delivered  to  the  faithful  as  a  thing  to  be  be- 
lieved with  divine  faith.  This  notion  is  never  men- 
tioned except  when  it  becomes  necessary  to  refer  to 
it  in  meeting  the  objections  of  opponents,  and  it  is 
always  asserted  that  it  does  not  belong  to  the  faith. 
It  is  not  to  be  admitted  that  in  those  circumstances, 
men  of  the  weightiest  character,  distinguished  with 
the  office  of  priest  or  bishop,  would  have  made  use  of 
verbal  quibbles  which  it  would  be  hardly  possible  tot 
their  opponents  to  understand  ;  such  a  quibble  would 
be  that  scholastic  distinction  between  a  doctrine  of  the 
faith  and  a  dogma  of  the  Catholic  faith.  The  bishop 
of  Elphin  said,  in  reply  to  the  archbishop  of  Cincin- 
nati, that  Catholics  had  not  denied  the  opinion  of 
the  infallibility  of  the  pope  as  a  doctrine  of  faith,  but 
had  denied  that  it  was  a  dogma  of  the  Catholic  or 
denned  faith.  If  this  is  true,  which  I  by  no  means 
believe,  the  reproach  is  justly  and  deservedly  to  be 
applied  to  us,  that  in  a  matter  of  the  gravest  conse- 
quence we  have  not  been  ashamed  to  hide  our  mean- 
ing by  making  use  of  scholastic  distinctions. 

It  remains  now  to  speak  of  the  faith  of  the  church 
of  Ireland. 

In  that  very  learned  speech  of  his,  which  remahis 
thus  far  unanswered,  and,  as  I  confidently  predict, 
will  continue  to  be  unanswered,  the  light  reverend 
bishop  of  St.  Augustine  in  North  America  (than 
whom  no  man  in  this  assembly  is  more  worthy  of  the 
respect  due,  at  all  times,  and  from  all  persons  what- 
soever, to  the  Episcopal  dignity)  remarked  that  the 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENIUCK.       145 

Irish  Catholics  believe  their  own  priests  infallible, 
and  therefore  (as  he  asserted)  it  was  no  wonder  that 
they  should  consider  the  pope  of  Kome  infallible. 
It  seemed  to  some  that  he  was  using  an  exaggerated 
expression,  rather  in  joke  than  in  earnest. 

And  yet  it  is  perfectly  true,  and  so  far  from  being 
a  reproach  to  Irishmen,  it  is  a  very  great  honor  to 
them,  and  in  the  highest  degree  agreeable  to  Catholic 
principles.  The  Irish  think  their  priests  infallible 
because  they  receive  them  as  the  ministers  of  the 
infallible  church,  and  therefore  as  in  accordance  with 
it  in  their  sermons  to  the  people.  In  just  that  sense 
and  no  other,  although  with  even  a  greater  reverence, 
on  account  of  his  higher  rank  in  the  hierarchy  of  the 
church,  they  accept  the  pope  of  Rome  as  infallible. 
I  admit  that  in  many  respects  they  are  inferior  to 
other  nations;  but  in  this  they  yield  to  none — that 
they  are  most  devoted  to  the  Catholic  faith,  and 
most  loyal  in  their  obedience  to  the  see  of  Rome. 
In  both  respects  that  may  be  said  of  them  which 
was  inscribed  by  Louis  XYI.  on  the  standard  of 
some  of  them,  who  had  served  as  mercenaries  under 
the  title  of  the  Irish  Brigade  in  his  army  and  in  those 
of  his  predecessors  from  Louis  XIY.'s  time — that 
they  were  "semper  et  ubiqiie fideles"  But  that  they 
have  any  intelligent  knowledge  of  the  question  now 
under  discussion,  or  are  capable  of  forming  an  opin- 
ion about  it,  is  too  ridiculous  to  need  refuting.  This 
is  true  of  the  meeting  lately  held  at  Cork,  of  which 
the  bishop  of  Cashel  spoke  at  the  opening  of  his  very 
neat  speech ;  since  it  is  open  to  doubt  whether  the 

Vatican  Council.  / 


146  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

right  reverend  bishop  of  Cork  himself,  who  was  said 
to  have  presided  at  the  meeting,  understood  Che  sub- 
ject; for  there  are  a  good  many  in  this  assembly  of 
ours  who  are  in  doubt  up  to  this  moment  what  is 
meant  by  papal  infallibility,  whether  it  is  to  follow 
the  words  of  the  schema,  or  in  preference  that  miti- 
gated Interpretation  which  the  archbishop  of  Malines, 
following  the  example  of  the  bishop  of  Poitiers,  in- 
troduced into  his  explanation.  For  those  cunning 
men  who  are  the  real  authors  of  the  schema — I  do 
not  mean  the  bishops;  whom  I  do  mean  will  appear 
before  long — well  knew  that  there  wire  many  of  the 
fathers  who  would  accept,  without  being  in  the  least 
startled,  the  mitigated  explanation  (which,  neverthe- 
less, had  not  yet  been  introduced  into  the  schema) 
and,  without  thinking,  would  vote  for  the  definition 
in  the  form  set  forth  in  the  schema,  at  least  for  sub- 
stance ;  whom  perhaps  a  clearer  statement  of  the 
sense  of  it  would  have  found  in  the  attitude  of  dis- 
sent from  it.     But  to  return  to  our  own  people. 

The  question  before  us  is  not  about  the  faith  of 
the  people,  but  about  the  judgment  of  prelates  and 
doctors.  I  do  not  deny  that,  at  the  present  time, 
the  episcopate  and  clergy  of  Ireland,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  a  few  distinguished  names,  is  inclined  in 
favor  of  the  notion  of  papal  infalhbihty;  although 
I  have  had  no  means  of  finding  out  their  opinions, 
except  what  this  opportunity  at  Rome  has  furnished 
me.  But  from  the  beginning  it  was  not  so ;  in  evi- 
dence of  which  I  cite  the  well-nigh  universal  appro- 
bation  with  which  the  contrary  opinion  was  set  forth 


SPEECH   OF   AEOHBISHOP   KENRICK.       147 

in  writings  from  the  pens  of  the  most  eminent  men — 
who  seemed  to  be  pillars,  as  I  might  say,  of  the  Irish 
church — during  my  youth,  and  since,  being  come  to 
manhood,  I  was  advanced  to  the  priesthood.  These 
writings  were  edited  and  published  repeatedly.by  a 
man  of  consummate  learning,  of  still  greater  genius, 
of  most  fervent  piety,  and  of  a  zeal  for  souls  truly 
apostolic,  adorned  with  the  episcopal  dignity — I 
mean  the  Eight  Beverend  James  Doyle,  bishop  of 
Kildare  and  Leighlen,  and  by  the  Eev.  Arthur  O'Lea- 
ry,  a  priest  of  the  order  of  St.  Francis,  and  seem 
to  have  had  the  approbation  of  every  one.  Besides 
these,  we  have  the  answers  of  Archbishops  Murray 
and  O'Kelly  of  Dublin  and  Tuam,  and  of  the  afore- 
said bishop  of  Kildare  and  Leighlen,  to  the  questions 
put  to  them  by  a  committee  of  the  British  Parlia- 
ment, in  March,  1825. 

All  these,  translated  into  Latin,  with  the  original 
text  annexed,  may  be  found  in  the  appendix  to  this 
speech.  They  leave  no  room  for  doubt  what  was  the 
opinion  of  the  Irish  bishops  at  that  time.  The  same 
will  be  manifest  from  the  resolutions  of  the  bishops 
of  all  Ireland  presented  to  the  Holy  See  in  1815, 
which,  although  they  do  not  pertain  to  the  present 
controversy,  like  the  answers  before  mentioned,  do 
show  that  the  opinion  which  is  said  to  be  now  prev- 
alent has  not  always  obtained."   4f  the  matters  cited 

[*  These  documents  may  be  found  in  full,  in  Latin  and  English, 
at  the  close  of  Kenrick's  speech  as  reprinted  in  the  Doc.  ad  lllustr. 
Cone.  Vat.  It  has  not  seemed  necessary  to  reproduce  them  in  this 
edition.] 


148  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

from  the  synod  of  Turles  seem  to  have  a  different 
sound,  perhaps  it  happened  there,  as  it  did  at  the 
second  synod  of  Baltimore,  that  everything  was 
done  according  to  the  nod  of  the  apostolic  legate  ; 
especially  as  no  question  arose  there  except  ques- 
tions of  discipline,  and  no  occasion  was  afforded  to 
say  or  to  decree  anything  on  the  rights  of  the  bish- 
ops, as  at  the  assembly  held  in  1815,  or  on  the  en- 
largement, in  words  at  least,  of  the  authority  of  the 
Holy  See. 

As  to  the  clergy,  I  confidently  deny  that  on  this 
point  they  differed  from  the  bishops.  For  whenco 
should  they  have  derived  a  contrary  opinion  ?  Sure- 
ly not  from  the  seminaries  in  France  and  Spain,  in 
which,  before  the  founding  of  Maynooth  college  in 
Ireland,  about  the  end  of  the  last  century,  the  major- 
ity pursued  their  theological  studies,  and  from  which 
they  would  have  brought  home  with  them  the  un- 
doubted sentiments  of  those  famous  schools,  and  not 
others.  But  in  Maynooth  college,  the  theological  lec- 
turers from  the  beginning  were  almost  all  Frenchmen ; 
and  their  treatises,  for  a  long  time  after  their  death, 
were,  by  college  ordinance,  placed  in  the  hands  of 
the  students.  I  was  myself  present  at  the  beginning 
of  the  change  in  the  sentiment  of  that  famous  col- 
lege— if  indeed  there  has  been  a  change,  of  which  I 
have  no  knowledgeaexcept  by  conjecture  ;  and  along 
with  me  was  the  bishop  of  Cashel  and  the  bishop  of 
Clonfert,  who  was  but  lately  here ;  all  of  us  at  that 
time  walked  together  with  one  accord  in  that  home 

*  Appendix  A. 


SPEECH   OF  ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       149 

consecrated  to  learning  and  religion.  This  was  the  oc- 
casion, to  which  it  will  perhaps  not  be  useless  to  refer. 

Almost  forty  years  have  passed  since  I  there  pur- 
sued the  study  of  theology  under  the  learned  John 
O'Hanlon,  then  lecturer  in  theology,  now  professor 
of  higher  theological  science  in  the  same  college. 
The  treatise  De  Ecclesia  by  that  man  of  venerated 
memory,  Delahogue,  one  of  the  French  emigres  in 
the  time  of  the  great  Revolution,  contained  nothing 
on  the  infallibility  of  the  pope  except  a  thesis  con- 
ceived in  these  or  like  words :  "that  the  infallibility 
of  the  pope  is  not  matter  of  faith." 

In  1831,  the  aforesaid  lecturer  on  theology,' O'Han- 
lon, of  his  own  accord  gave  us  the  thesis.  "  The  pope 
speaking  ex  cathedra  is  infallible,"  not  in  order  to  con- 
vince us  of  it,  but  to  give  us  the  opportunity  of  be- 
coming acquainted  with  this  weighty  opinion,  by  the 
reasons  in  favor  of  it,  adduced  from  various  quarters. 
If  I  remember  aright,  he  did  not  express  his  own 
opinion  or  press  us  to  accept  either  side  of  this  dis- 
puted question.  I  confess  that  I  was  one  of  those 
who  took  the  affirmative.  But  the  new  and  hitherto 
unheard-of  procedure  did  not  meet  the  approval  of 
all  the  professors,  one  of  whom,  the  lecturer  on  Holy 
Scripture,  who  afterwards  came  to  be  president  of 
the  college,  expressed  his  displeasure  in  pretty  plain 
terms  to  my  classmate,  now  bishop  of  Clonfert,  from 
whom  I  learned  the  fact.  We  have  with  us  in  this 
Council  a  most  respected  man,  who  used  to  be  a  the- 
ological instructor  in  that  college  for  years  before  I 
entered  it,  who  is  justly  and  deservedly  esteemed  the 


150  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

Nestor  of  the  Irish  episcopate,  since  he  has  known 
well  nigh  three  generations  of  men,  and  who  to  emi- 
nent learning  hi  theology  unites  the  fame  of  elegant 
literary  culture ;  he  was  well  acquainted  with  the  prel- 
ates whom  I  have  mentioned,  and  with  other  learn- 
ed men  whose  names,  "dara  el  venerabilia,"  are  writ- 
ten in  the  hearts  and  the  calendars  of  the  Irish  peo- 
ple. With  singular  moderation  this  eminent  man 
refrained  from  uttering  himself  on  this  subject;  so 
that  the  archbishop  of  Dublin  did  not  hesitate  to 
speak  for  him  and  impress  him  into  his  party ;  while 
those  who  think  with  1m1,  and  had  known  liim,  and 
who  had  hoped  to  see  him  fighting  in  our  ranks,  were 
grieved  to  see  him,  like  another  Aehilles,  Bitting  apart 
from  us.  It  filled  me  with  quite  unexpected  delight 
when  I  heard  him  say  that  in  judgments  of  faith  the 
head  should  be  joined  with  the  body — not  as  the 
archbishop  of  Westminster  would  have  it,  that  the 
head  should  drag  the  body  to  itself  by  communica- 
ting to  it  its  own  infallibility,  but  that  head  and  body, 
by  bearing  joint  testimony  to  the  faith  once  delivered 
to  the  saints,  should  make  unanimous  declaration  of 
the  same.  As  he  came  down  from  the  platform,  I 
congratulated  him  with  the  words,  "  You  have  vindi- 
cated Ireland."  If  witnesses  to  the  faith  of  the 
Irish  are  to  be  weighed — which  is  the  fair  way — in- 
stead of  counted,  the  most  reverend  archbishop  of 
Tuam  may  well  be  offset,  as  a  matter  of  mere  testi- 
mony, against  the  rest  of  the  Irish  bishops,  not  even 
excepting  the  archbishop  of  Dublin.* 

[*  "The  infallibilist  speaker  who  created  most  sensation  was 


SPEECH  OF  ARCHBISHOP  KENRICK.   151 

The  bishop  of  Galway  says  that  the  Catholics  in 
Ireland  and  England  were  admitted  to  equal  rights 
with  Protestants,  not  on  account  of  the  oath  which 
all,  whether  ecclesiastics  or  laymen,  were  for  years 
obliged  to  take,  but  because  those  in  charge  of  the 
English  government  were  afraid  of  civil  war  unless 
that  concession  were  made.  In  this  he  spoke  the 
truth ;  but  it  was  nothing  to  the  point ;  and  the  true 
cause  of  the  truth  which  he  uttered  seemed  to  be 
quite  unknown  to  him. 

The  papal  power  has  always  been  excessively 
odious-to  the  British  government.  Now  if  it  were  a 
doctrine  of  faith  that  the  pope  is  infallible,  it  could 
be  shown  that  Protestants  had  understood  the  papal 
power  better  than  English  and  Irish  Catholics  them- 
selves. For  they  knew  that  the  popes  of  Kome  had 
claimed  supreme  power  in  temporal  things,  and  had  at- 
tempted to  dethrone  more  than  one  English  monarch 
by  dispensing  his  subjects  from  their  oaths  of  allegiance. 

Cardinal  Cullen,  archbishop  of  Dublin.  He  gained  the  warm  ap- 
plause of  his  party  by  the  aggressive  tone  of  his  speech,  in  which 
he  attacked  especially  Hefele  and  Kenrick.  He  appealed  to  the 
testimony  of  Mac  Hale  [Archbishop  of  Tuam]  to  show  that  the 
mind  of  Ireland  has  always  been  infallibilist— a  glaring  falsehood, 
as  is  proved  by  the  famous  Declaration  of  the  Irish  Catholics  in 
1757,  formally  repudiating  the  doctrine.  And  it  made  no  slight 
impression  when  the  gray-haired  Mac  Hale  rose  to  repudiate  the 
pretended  belief  in  infallibility,  not  merely  for  himself,  but  for 
Ireland."  Quirinus,  557.  Wherever  this  Speech  of  Kenrick's 
throws  light  upon  the  severest  things  said  in  Quirinus  and  Ce  qui 
se  passe  au  Concile,  etc. ,  it  confirms  them.  "Witness  the  very  next 
page  of  Quirinus  :  ' '  When  Cullen  replied  to  the  archbishop  of  St. 
Louis,  lnon  est  verum'  ['it  isn't  true  !']  the  aged  prelate  request- 
ed leave  of  the  legates  to  defend  himself  briefly.  It  was  refused.  ' 
Compare  above,  p.  95.] 


152  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

Over  and  over  again,  the  Catholics  had  denied, 
under  their  solemn  oath,  that  this  power  belonged  to 
the  pope  of  Rome  within  the  realm  of  England.  If 
they  had  not  done  this,  they  never  would  have  been, 
and  never  ought  to  have  been,  admitted  to  the  privi- 
lege of  civil  liberty.  How  it  is  possible  for  the  faith 
thus  pledged  to  the  British  government  to  be  recon- 
ciled with  the  definition  of  papal  infallibility,  when  it 
is  certain  that  the  popes  have  often  with  great  solem- 
nity declared  that  the  right  belonged  to  them,  and 
have  never  renounced  it,  those  of  the  Irish  bishops 
may  look  to,  who,  like  myself,  have  taken  the  oath 
in  question.  It  is  a  knot  which  I  cannot  untie. 
Daunts  sum,  non  (Edipus,  Notwithstanding  these 
things,  civil  liberty  was  granted  to  the  Catholics  by 
men  who  had  fought  stoutly  against  it  all  their  lives 
long.  They  feared  civil  war,  indeed,  but  they  did 
not  dread  it  in  this  sense,  that  a  war  of  this  sort 
could  be  damaging  to  the  power  of  the  government 
in  any  other  way  than  as  a  temporary  interruption 
of  the  public  peace.  They  feared  the  fact  of  war — 
not  the  issue  of  it ;  what  that  would  have  been,  no 
man  of  sense  could  doubt.  Those  illustrious  men 
preferred  rather  to  yield,  than  to  triumph  by  the 
destruction  of  a  renowned  nation,  and  of  a  people  who 
even  in  their  errors  (as  they  deemed  them)  were 
worthy  of  a  better  fate.  Would  that  the  moderation 
of  mind  showed  by  those  men  might  be  showed  by  the 
majority  of  the  bishops  who  hear  me,  and  that  fore- 
seeing the  calamities  that  may  come  forth  among  us 
out  of  this  ill-omened  controversy,  they  might,  in 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENEICK.       153 

this  exigency  that  calls  for  the  utmost  moderation, 
avert  from  ns  who  are  less  in  number,  but  who  repre- 
sent a  larger  number  of  Catholics  than  our  oppo- 
nents— and  not  from  us  only,  but  from  the  Catholic 
world — calamities  which  cannot  be  anticipated  with- 
out horror,  and  which  a  tardy  repentance  will  be 
powerless  to  repair. 

IX.  I  have  something  to  say  now  on  a  case  of 
conscience.  The  case  is  this,  as  you  know  :  that  the 
bishops  should  be  reminded  that  a  grave  sin  would 
be  committed  by  any  bishop  who  should  vote  in  the 
affirmative  on  papal  infallibility,  without  having  per- 
sonally and,  as  the  phrase  goes,  "on  his  own  hook," 
made  a  thorough  examination  of  the  subject ;  when 
by  that  act  a  new  yoke  is  imposed  on  the  faithful, 
and  the  gravest  inconveniences  are  by  many  thought 
likely  to  ensue  from  it.*  . 

The  archbishop  of  Westminster  takes  this  very 
hardly,  complaining  of  it  as  an  outrage  on  the  honor 
and  dignity  of  the  bishops ;  as  if  he  held  it  impossi- 
ble for  bishops  to  err,  or  that  they  would  be  clear  of 
all  imputation  of  grave  sin,  if  through  carelessness 
or  indolence  they  should  neglect  to  form  a  right 
judgment  on  this  business. 

Can  they  acquiesce  in  an  opinion  which  perhaps 
they  have  never  weighed — following  the  statements 
of  teachers  in  the  seminaries,  with  the  docility  which 
is  becoming  in  pupils  towards  the  learned?  The 
pamphlet  by  the  most  reverend  archbishop  of  Edes- 
sa,  commended  to  the  pope   by  the  eleven  erudite 

*  See  Quirinus,  021. 

7* 


154  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

theologians,  is  perhaps  to  be  taken  as  setting  forth 
such  weighty  reasons  in  proof  of  the  infallibility  of 
the  pope,  that  since  no  one  ought  to  hesitate  to  put 
confidence  in  it,  every  one  may  safely  accept  its  con- 
clusions as  so  many  truths  placed  beyond  every 
chance  of  doubt.  I  am  not  denying  the  writer's 
learning ;  neither  do  I  wish  to  call  in  question  his 
good  faith ;  but  I  can  prove  that  in  this  matter  he  is 
not  free  from  all  error,  and  that  thus  far  his  author- 
ity is  none  too  much  to  be  trusted.  Besides  the 
example  already  alleged  when  I  was  speaking  of  the 
meaning  of  the  text  "On  this  rock/'  &e.,  I  mention 
two  others:  one  from  the  testimonies  of  the  fathers, 
the  other  in  the  method  of  his  argument. 

Among  the  passages  which  he  cites  from  the 
fathers  is  that  very  common  text  of  St.  Ambrose, 
Which  I  subjoin,  taken  from  pages  31  and  32 : 

"  On  Psalm  40,  No.  30,  he  speaks  as  follows  :  '  It 
is  Peter  himself  to  whom  he  says,  "  Thou  art  Peter, 
and  on  this  rock  will  I  build  my  church."  Therefore 
where  Peter  is,  there  is  the  church ;  where  the 
church  is,  there  is  no  death,  but  life  eternal.  And 
therefore  he  adds,  "And  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not 
prevail  against  it ;  and  I  will  give  thee  the  keys  of 
the  kingdom  of  heaven."  Blessed  Peter,  against 
whom  the  gates  of  hell  have  not  prevailed,  nor  the 
gates  of  heaven  been  closed,  but  who,  on  the  con- 
trary, has  destroyed  the  vestibules  of  hell,  and  made 
clear  those  of  heaven — who  has  opened  heaven  and 
shut  up  hell !  Doubtless  if  where  Peter  is,  (or  where 
his  successors,  the  popes,  are,  holding  all  the  prerog- 


SPEECH  OF  ARCHBISHOP  KENRICK.   155 

atives  of  the  primacy,)  there  the  church  is,  and  life 
eternal  without  peril  of  death,  then  the  whole  build- 
ing of  the  church  must  necessarily  be  founded  in 
their  faith.  Wherefore  this  must  needs  be  indefec- 
tible, and  so  the  gates  of  hell  being  vanquished,  they 
themselves,  embracing  in  the  true  faith  all  Christ's 
faithful,  open  to  them  the  heavenly  mansions.' " 

This  passage  was  cited  by  the  bishop  of  Orleans,* 
in  his  first  letter,  as  one  which  might  be  objected  to 
his  position,  and  he  there  explained  it  in  a  sense 
consistent  with  his  views,  having  no  doubt  that  the 
text  of  Ambrose  was  to  be  received  in  some  other 
sense  than  the  obvious  one,  and  that,  really,  it  meant 
that  the  church  was  identified  with  Peter  in  the  case 
of  controverted  points  of  faith,  which,  so  far  from 
denying,  the  bishop  openly  admitted.  Among  others 
who  replied  to  this  letter,  was  the  learned  Francesco 
Nardi,  one  of  the  Auditors  of  the  Sacred  Bota,  and  an 
officer  of  this  Council.  Yielding  to  love  of  truth 
rather  than  of  party,  he  denies  that  the  words  of  St. 
Ambrose  have  the  meaning  which  the  bishop  of 
Orleans,  among  others,  believed.  I  quote  his  words 
in  the  original  Italian,  so  that  no  one  may  suspect 
that  the  meaning  of  them  has  been  modified  in  trans- 
lation. After  giving  the  explanation  of  the  bishop  of 
Orleans,  above  referred  to,  he  adds : 

"  Del  resto  il  valore  delle  parole  di  S.  Ambrogio 
(in  psalm  xl.,  Enarr.  n.  30)  non  credo  sia  quello  che 
indica  lo  illustre  vescovo,  e  basta  leggerne  il  con- 
testo.     Ivi  trattasi  della  caduta  di  S.  Pietro  sanata 

*  Bishop  Dupanloup. 


15G  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

da  Cristo,  e  come  Pietro  in  essa  rappresenti  il  cristi- 
ano  cadente,  poi  risorgente,  per  opera  della  Cbiesa  e 
di  Cristo,  senza  dnbbio  quelle  parole  hanno  un  altro 
piii  ampio  ed  alto  significato,  ed  b  Che  Pietro  piii  cbe 
contrasegno,  e  veramente  il  rappresentante  della 
vera  Cbiesa  e  la  sua  immagine  vivente  e  operante. 
Non  credo  cbe  S.  Ambrogio  in  quel  luogo  pensasse 
ad  altre  cJuese  crisUane,  e  come  da  esse  si  distingue  la 
cattolica,  per  la  presenza  e  governo  di  Pietro."* 

"  Furthermore,  I  do  not  tbink  that  the  meaning 
of  St.  Ambrose'  words  is  that  attributed  to  them  by 
the  illustrious  bishop.  The  context  settles  it.  The 
subject  there  is  Peter's  fall  restored  by  Christ ;  and 
since  Peter  represents  therein  the  backsliding  Chris- 
tian afterwards  recovered  through  the  work  of  Christ 
and  the  church,  undoubtedly  the  words  have  another 
and  a  far  wider  and  deeper  meaning,  to  wit,  that 
Peter  is  more  than  a  symbol — he  is  an  actual  repre- 
sentative of  the  true  church,  and  its  living  and  acting 
image.  I  do  not  think  that  St.  Ambrose  in  that 
passage  was  thinking  of  other  Chris! urn  churches,  and 
of  how  the  Catholic  church  is  distinguished  from 
them  by  the  presence  and  government  of  Peter,  "f 

Monsignor  Nardi  is  right,  as  I  find  by  consulting 
the  passage  in  Ambrose.     I  beg  you  to  observe  that 

*  Sulla  ultima  lettera  di  Monsignor  Vescovo  d'Orleans,  osser- 
vazioni  di  Monsignor  Francesco  Nardi,  Uditore  di  Sacra  Rota. 
Seconda  Edizione.     Napoli,  1870. 

f  It  is  quite  in  the  style  of  Ambrose  thus  devoutly  and  ele- 
gantly to  identify  Peter  with  the  church.  See  lib.  1,  cap.  4,  Lucce. 
Also  lib.  5  in  Lucce  cap.  5.  Also  the  context  just  precedirg  the 
place  above  cited. 


SPEECH   OF  ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       157 

the  passage  was  quoted  to  prove  that  Peter  is  iden- 
tified with  the  church — -which  we  all  admit,  but  not 
in  the  sense  of  the  schema.  It  is  not  qu6ted  to  prove 
that  by  the  rock  Ambrose  understands  the  apostle, 
for  this  is  not  the  point  in  question.  Unless,  in  the 
place  cited,  the  church  is  identified  with  Peter  in  the 
sense  of  the  schema,  it  affords  no  argument  in  support 
of  the  schema.  The  same  must  be  said  of  all  the 
other  quotations,  not  one  of  which  explicitly  gives 
that  view,  although  the  writer  attempts,  by  dint  of 
argument  to  extract  it  from  them.  This  one  example 
shows  how  dangerous  it  is  blindly  to  follow  others  in 
quoting  the  fathers.  A  striking  proof  of  this  may  be 
found  in  the  appendix  to  this  speech ;  although  it 
does  not  relate  to  the  pending  question,  it  gives 
abundant  proof  of  my  assertion,  and  may  serve  the 
purpose  I  have  in  view.* 

As  an  example  of  false  inference,  I  take  page  74, 
where  the  author  tries  to  prove  that  the  Council  of 
Constance  admitted  that  the  pope  was  above  the 
Council,  a  question  which  I  will  not  go  into  at  pres- 
ent.    He  proves  it  in  this  fashion  : 

[*  In  the  appendix  referred  to,  Abp.  Kenriclc  speaks  of  having 
heard,  twelve  years  ago,  an  Easter  sermon  in  which  the  preacher 
said  that  the  Lord  after  his  resurrection  appeared  first  to  the 
blessed  Virgin  Mary — which  is  contrary  to  Mark  16  :  0.  Inquir- 
ing further,  he  found  the  same  assertion  in  a  work  of  Pope  Bene- 
dict XIV.,  who,  while  remarking  that  Estius  declares  the  contrary, 
nevertheless  thought  it  better  to  stick  to  the  pious  tradition  on  this 
point,  notwithstanding  it  is  in  open  contradiction  to  the  loords  of  the 
evangelist  I 

The  remainder  of  this  appendix  is  not  important  to  the  matter 
in  hand  ;  but  the  passage  above  quoted  is  wonderfully  character- 
istic of  Roman  theology  and  devotion.] 


158  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

"In  the  conciliar  epistle,  addressed  to  the  Ger- 
man prelates,  which  Martin,  *  sacro  approbante 
Concilio,'  published  against  the  errors  of  Wiclif  and 
Huss,  one  of  the  articles  set  forth  to  be  believed  is 
this :  That  the  pope  is  the  head  of  the  Catholic 
church.  Therefore  the  pope  bears  the  same  relation 
to  the  church  universal  and  to  the  general  Council 
representing  it  as  the  head  bears  fcd  the  body.  But 
from  the  head  the  body  receives  motion  and  every 
influence.  Therefore,  according  to  the  Council  of 
Constance  itself,  a  general  council  receives  all  its 
power  of  governing  the  church,  not  immediately  from 
Christ,  but  mediately,  through  the  pope,  the  head  of 
the  cluircli.  But  this  cannot  be  reconciled  with  what 
is  said  in  the  decree  of  the  fourth  and  fifth  sessions, 
if  the  latter  is  to  be  received  in  the  sense  in  which  it 
is  taken  by  the  opposition." 

The  fallacy  of  the  above  reasoning  is  this :  The 
pope  is  Christ's  vicegerent  in  so  far  as  Christ  has 
conferred  on  him  the  power  of  representing  Him  as 
the  visible  head  to  the  faithful.  But  in  the  foregoing 
argument  Christ  is  supposed  to  have  conferred  on 
him  the  entire  fulness  of  his  own  power,  inasmuch 
as  he  is  the  head  of  the  church,  which  is  His  body ; 
a  notion  which  is  denied  by  the  advocates  of  the 
opposite  opinion.  He  who  exercises  a  delegated 
power  is  not  to  be  considered  as  having  the  entire 
power  of  the  one  delegating,  but  only  just  so  much 
as  can  be  proved,  by  the  documents  in  the  case,  to 
have  been  conferred  upon  him.  The  church,  there- 
fore, may  receive  motion  and  every  influence  imme- 


SPEECH   OF    ARCHBISHOP   KENEICK.       159 

diately  from  Clirist  himself,  tlie  true  head  of  the 
body,  not  through  the  medium  of  the  visible  head — 
that  is,  the  Koman  pontiff— unless  it  appears  that 
Christ,  in  the  government  of  his  church,  has  reserved 
nothing  to  himself ;  which  is  supposed,  but  not 
proved,  by  the  author  of  the  Lucubration. 

Speaking  of  the  case  of  conscience,  the  arch- 
bishop of  Baltimore  asserted  that  examination  was 
no  less  required  to  vote  in  the  negative  than  in  the 
affirmative  on  the  question  of  papal  infallibility.  I 
think  he  was  mistaken.  He  who  refuses  his  consent 
to  impose  a  new  burden  on  the  faithful  contracts  no 
obligation ;  while  he  who  gives  his  consent  (unless, 
under  the  force  of  reasons  such  as  set  aside  all 
doubt,  he  should  decide  that  the  affirmative  opinion 
is  not  only  true,  but  also  divinely  revealed,  and  that 
it  is  expedient  to  propound  it  as  such  to  the  faithful 
to  be  believed)  would  be  guilty  of  the  most  grievous 
sin.  It  is  not  true  that  by  withholding  his  assent  he 
affirms  the  four  articles  of  the  French  Assembly,  as 
the  archbishop  of  Baltimore  says — an  assertion 
which  seemed  to  me  and  to  others  unworthy  of  so 
honorable  a  man. 

And  now  that  that  famous  Assembly  has  been 
mentioned,  and  now  that  an  acrimonious  attack  has 
been  made  by  one  of  our  right  reverend  orators  on 
a  man  of  eminent  learning  and  character  on  account 
of  his  refutation  of  a  so-called  history  of  that  Assem- 
bly, suffer  me  to  say  a  word  of  both  these  books, 
which  I  have  not  only  read  but  carefully  compared 
with    each    other.       The   Historv   of   the   Gallican 


160  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

Assembly,    which    has    been    so   bepraised,    is   in 

my  judgment  a  very  infamous  libel,  the  author  of 
which  has  sharpened  his  pen  against  the  dead,  dis- 
turbing the  ashes  of  those  who  had  no  connection 
whatever  with  the  Assembly,  ;is  well  as  of  those  who 
controlled  and  directed  it.* 

That  he  has  made  many  mutilated  quotations, 
which,  by  failing  to  give  the  whole  text,  insinuate 
falsehood  even  when  they  do  not  explicitly  utter  it, 
has  been  proved  by  the  Abbe*  Loyson.f  That  learned 
man  has  exhibited  these  facts  with  the  calmness  of 
mind  which  is  characteristic  of  him,  and  which,  when 
compared  with  the  temper  of  the  other  book,  shows 
him  to  be  a  defender  of  truth  and  not  an  insinuater 
of  falsehood.  This  accounts  for  the  anger  which  he 
has  stirred  up  on  the  part  of  his  antagonists, 

X.  The  archbishop  of  Westminster  holds  infalli- 
bility to  be  a  spiritual  gift,  or  charisma.  If  that  is 
true,  I  agree  to  it  in  the  case  of  the  person  making 
good  his  claim  to  the  gift ;  for  in  the  strict  sense  of 
the  word  it  is  predicable  only  of  a  person.  The 
usage  has  prevailed,  indeed,  of  predicating  infalli- 
bility, of  the  church,  but  it  would  be  better  to  use 
the  word  inerrancy. 

God  only  is  infallible.  Of  the  church,  the  most 
that  we  can  assert  is,  that  it  does  not  err  in  teaching 

*  Reckerclies  Historiques  sur  l'Assemblec;  da  Clerge  de  France 
de  1G82,  par  M.  Germ. 

f  L'Assernbleo  du  Clerge  de  France  de  1682,  d'apres  dea  docu- 
ments dont  un  grand  nombre  inconnues  jusqu'  a  ce  jour,  par 
l'Abbe  I.  Th.  Loyson,  Docteur  et  Professeur  de  Sorbonne.  [The 
Abbe  Loyson  is  a  younger  brother  of  the  cobbrated  Father 
Hyacinths.  ] 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       161 

the  doctrines  of  faith  which  Christ  has  committed  to 
its  charge ;  because  the  gates  of  hell  are  not  to  pre- 
vail against  it.  Therefore  infallibility  absolute  and 
complete  cannot  be  predicated  of  it ;  and  perhaps  it 
would  be  better  to  refrain  from  using  that  word,  and 
use  the  word  inerrancy  instead.  But  the  church's 
inerrancy  does  not  seem  to  be  a  positive  thing, 
infused  into  it  from  heaven — which  could  not  be 
intelligently  said  of  a  "  moral  person "  like  the 
church — although  it  is  always  so  aided  by  the  grace 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  that  it  may  faithfully  keep  and  set 
forth  the  truths  which  Christ  had  taught.  For  this 
end  it  has  a  fit  means— but  not  at  all  a  miraculous 
means — in  the  tradition  of  the  particular  churches  of 
which  it  consists.  Therefore  the  inerrancy,  or  infal- 
libility, of  the  church  is  not  a  cltarisnta  infused  from 
heaven,  as  the  archbishop  of  Westminster  would 
have  it,  by  which  it  may  discover  and  distinguish 
truths  divinely  revealed.  It  is  nothing  else,  in  my 
opinion,  than  the  tradition  of  the  church  divinely 
founded  and  kept  by  the  divine  indwelling,  so  that 
it  shall  not  tolerate  errors  contradicting  revealed 
truths  and  their  immediate  and  necessary  corollaries, 
nor  propound  to  the  faithful,  by  its  supreme  author- 
ity, anything  that  is  not  true. 

As  I  was  saying  this,  not  long  ago,  a  Catholic 
objected  that  infallibility  though  not  a  miraculous, 
was  a  supernatural  gift ;  that  is,  a  grace  annexed  to 
the  office  of  pope,  by  means  of  which,  without  any 
miraculous  intervention  of  God  he  can  discern  true 
from  false  and  revealed  truth  from  natural. 


162  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

Since  the  Roman  pontiff,  as  bishop,  has  no  other 
grace  of  ordination  than  his  brethren  who  share  the 
same  Episcopal  office,  the  supposed  grace  can  only 
be  a  personal  one.  But  that  kind  of  grace  does  not 
preserve  from  error  those  even  to  whom  it  is  granted 
in  the  largest  measure,  as  appears  from  the  saints 
who  in  the  great  schism  were  found  on  both  sides, 
although  eminent  in  virtue  and  splendid  with  the 
glory  of  miracles.  If  papal  infallibility  is  a  personal 
grace  or  charisma,  as  the  archbishop  of  Westminster 
calls  it,  it  demands  a  miraculous  intervention  of  God, 
that  the  pope,  when  he  means  to  define  anything  of 
faith  or  morals,  may  be  kept  free  from  error. 

It  may  be  shown  in  another  way  that  this  novel 
invention  of  the  charisma  ought  to  be  rejected,  from 
the  consequences  which  it  involves.  Granting  that 
infalhbility  is  a  charisma,  in  what  does  it  differ  from 
that  special  private  inspiration  by  which  certain  per- 
sons think  themselves  led,  and  which  is  rejected  by 
theologians  on  this  precise  ground,  that  no  means  is 
granted,  outside  of  the  person  who  considers  himself 
to  be  led  by  the  divine  Spirit,  by  which  it  may  be 
proved  whether  the  spirit  really  is  divine.  Not  one 
word  will  the  archbishop  of  Westminster  listen  to,  of 
fixing  the  conditions  for  the  exercise  of  the  pope's 
infallibility.  He  asserts  that  He  who  gave  the 
charisma  will  give  the  means  for  its  due  exercise,  or 
will  bring  it  about  that  such  means  shall  be  used. 

Yerily  this  is  a  royal  road  to  the  discovery  of  the 
truths  of  faith !  And  yet  it  is  not  without  its  dangers 
both  for  pope  and  for  church.     Once  imbued  with 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.       163 

this  conviction,  the  holier  in  life,  the  purer  in  pur- 
pose, the  more  fervent  in  piety  the  pope  should  be, 
the  more  dangerous  he  would  prove  both  to  himself 
and  to  the  church,  which  (according  to  this  system) 
derives  its  infallibility  from  him ;  especially  would 
this  be  true  if  he  should  find  even  one  of  his  advisers 
laboring  under  the  same  illusion.  What  need  would 
there  be,  to  a  pope  who  accepted  this  notion,  of  the 
counsel  of  his  brethren,  the  opinions  of  theologians, 
the  investigation  of  the  documents  of  the  church? 
Believing  himself  to  be  immediately  led  by  the 
divine  Spirit,  and  that  this  Spirit  is  communicated 
through  him  to  the  church,  there  would  be  nothing 
to  hold  him  back  from  pressing  on  in  a  course  on 
which  he  had  once  entered.  These  consequences  of 
the  principle  laid  down  by  the  archbishop  of  West- 
minster prove  it  to  be  false.  Nevertheless  if  infalli- 
bility is  a  charisma,  we  must  be  able  to  follow  out 
the  fact  to  its  conclusions. 

XI.  Among  other  things  which  utterly  astounded 
me,  it  was  said  by  the  archbishop  of  Westminster 
that  by  the  addition  made  at  the  end  of  the  decree 
De  Fide,  passed  at  the  third  session,  we  had  already 
admitted  the  doctrine  of  papal  infallibility,  at  least 
by  implication,  and  that  we  were  no  longer  free  to 
recede  from  it.* 

*  The  addition  was  as  follows  :  "  Since  it  is  not  enough  to  avoid 
heretical  pravity,  unless  at  the  same  time  those  errors  are  diligent- 
ly avoided  which  more  or  less  tend  to  it,  we  warn  all  persons  of 
the  duty  of  observing  also  the  constitutions  and  decrees  in  which 
such  erroneous  opinions,  which  themselves  are  not  expressly  enu- 
merated, have  been  proscribed  and  prohibited  by  this  Holy  See." 


1G4  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

If  I  rightly  understand  the  right  reverend  relator 
of  the  committee,  who,  when  this  addition  had  once 
been  moved  in  the  General  Congregation,  then  with- 
drawn, and  finally,  while  we  W6T6  wondering  what  the 
matter  was,  suddenly  moved  a  second  time,  he  said,  in 
plain  terms,  that  no  doctrine  at  all  was  taught  bj  it, 
hut  that  it  was  placed  at  the  end  of  the  four  chapters 
of  which  the  decree  was  composed,  in  order  to  round 
them  oil'  handsomely;11  and  that  it  was  rather  disci- 
plinary than  doctrinal  in  its  character.  Either  lie 
was  deceived,  if  what  the  archbishop  of  Westminster 
said  was  tine;  or  else  lie  intentionally  led  us  into 
error — which  we  are  hardly  at  liberty  to  suppo 
so  honorable  a  man.  However  it  may  have  been, 
many  of  the  bishops,  confiding  in  his  assurance, 
decided  not  to  refuse  their  suffrages  to  the  decree  on 
account  of  that  clause  ;  while  others,  of  whom  I  was 
one,  were  afraid  that  there  was  a  trap  set,  and  yield- 
ed reluctantly  on  this  point  to  the  will  of  others. ! 

In  saying  all  this,  it  is  not  my  intention  to  ac- 
cuse any  of  the  right  reverend  fathers  of  bad  faith. 
I  treat  them  all,  as  is  meet,  with  due  reverence.  But 
it  is  said  that  we  have  among  us,  outside  of  the 
Council,  certain  "religious"  men — who  are  perhaps 
pious  as  well  as  "religious" — who  have  a  vast  influ- 
ence upon  the  Council;  who,  relying  rather  on  trick- 
ery than  on  fair  measures,  have  brought  the  interests 
of  the  church  into  that  extreme  peril  from  which  it 
has  risen ;  who  at  the  beginning  of  the  Council  man- 

[*   "Imponi  tanquani  eis  coronidem  convenientem."] 
f  Appendix,  p.  171.     See  also  above,  p.  83. 


SPEECH    OF  ARCHBISHOP  KENHICK.       165 

aged  to  have  no  one  appointed  on  the  committees  of 
the  Council  but  those  who  were  known  or  believed 
to  be  in  favor  of  their  schemes ;  who,  following  hard 
in  the  footsteps  of  certain  of  their  predecessors,  in 
the  schemata  that  have  been  proposed  to  us,  and 
which  have  come  out  of  their  own  workshop,  seem  to 
have  had  nothing  so  much  at  heart  as  the  deprecia- 
tion of  the  authority  of  the  bishops  and  the  exalta- 
tion of  the  authority  of  the  pope ;  and  seem  disposed 
to  impose  upon  the  unwary  with  twists  and  turns  of 
expression,  which  may  be  differently  explained  by 
different  persons.  These  are  the  men  who  have 
blown  up  this  conflagration  in  the  church ;  and  they 
do  not  cease  to  fan  the  flame  by  spreading  among 
the  people  their  writings,  which  put  on  the  outward 
show  of  piety,  but  are  destitute  of  its  reality. 

With  more  zeal  than  knowledge,  these  excellent 
men  would  like  to  cover  up  the  design  of  the  divine 
Architect  with  another  and,  as  they  may  think,  a 
better  and  stronger  one.  For  He  had  consulted  at 
once  for  the  unity  of  the  whole,  and  the  liberty  of 
every  part ;  nor  had  he  conferred  the  entire  fulness 
of  his  own  power  on  the  vicar  appointetl  by  himself; 
knowing  what  was  in  man,  and  not  wishing  that  any 
one  should  have  lordship  over  the  dergy,  that  is,  his 
"portion,"  [n?Jjpoc~\  the  church. 

Already  in  vain  the  petition  has  been  offered  that 
this  painful  controversy  might  not  be  started  in  the 
Council.  Equally  in  vain  the  petition  has  been 
urged  that  there  might  be  no  definition  until  after 
an   examination  which   should   leave  no  room  for 


1GG  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

doubt  as  to  the  testimony  of  tradition  on  this  point. 
In  order  to  such  an  examination,  the  request  was 
presented,  nearly  three  months  ago,  to  their  eminen- 
ces the  presidents  of  the  general  congregation,  in  a 
petition  from  prelates  of  distinguished  sees,  that 
there  might  be  a  committee  of  fathers,  taken  in  equal 
number  from  each  party,  and  appointed  by  the  votes 
of  those  agreeing  nith  them  in  opinion.  This  re- 
quest was  repeated  over  and  over  again  by  others  in 
the  General  Congregation;  and  is  said  to  have  had 
the  approval  of  some  even  of  (he  advocates  of  papal 
infallibility.  For  the  question  is  one  which  calls  for 
an  investigation  of  the  records  of  the  entire  church, 
and  should  be  dealt  with  in  a  calm  rather  than  an 
excited  temper.  The  archbishop  of  Dublin  says,  in- 
deed, that  such  an  examination  would  last  too  long — 
that  it  would  reach  till  the  day  of  judgment.  If  this 
be  so,  it  were  better  to  refrain  from  making  any  defi- 
nition at  all,  than  to  frame  one  prematurely.  But  it 
is  said  the  honor  and  authority  of  the  Holy  See  de- 
mand a  definition,  nor  can  it  be  deferred  without 
injury  to  both.  I  answer  in  the  words  of  Jerome, 
substituting  another  word  for  the  well-known'  word 
auctoritas. 

MAJOR  EST  SALUS  ORBIS  QUAM  UltBIS  * 

I  have  done. 

*  It  is  better  to  save  the  world  than  the  city. 


SPEECH'OF   ARCHBISHOP  KENKICK.       167 


APPENDIX  A. 

[SEE  PAGE  148.] 

SECOND  PLENARY  COUNCIL  OF  BALTI- 
MORE. 

The  remarks  in  the  speech  call  for  a  brief  state- 
ment of  the  facts  which  occurred  in  that  Council.  It 
commenced  on  the  7th  of  October,  and  closed  on  the 
21st  of  the  same  month,  each  of  these  two  days  be- 
ing Sunday.  Beside.s  the  solemn  sessions  held  on 
these  days,  there  were  two  others  on  intermediate 
days,  namely,  the  11th  and  the  18th,  only  the  latter 
of  which  was  professedly  a  solemn  session,  although 
the  other,  dedicated  to  expiation  for  the  souls  of  de- 
parted bishops,  was  an  equal  hinderance  to  the  use 
at  least  of  the  whole  day  for  the  business  of  the 
Council ;  so  that  the  business  was  confined  to  ten  or 
eleven  days.  Within  that  brief  space  of  time,  there 
seem  to  have  been  passed  the  decrees  which  are 
contained  in  274  pages  of  a  volume  of  large  size. 
All  of  them,  indeed,  had  been  prepared,  in  advance 
of  the  meeting  of  the  Council,  by  the  archbishop  of 
Baltimore,  with  the  cooperation  of  several  theologi- 
ans, and  the  aid  of  sundry  bishops,  of  whom  I  was 
one. 

The  transactions  of  the  first  four  days  seemed  to 
me  hardly  in  accordance  with  the  rules  of  Councils, 
and  accordingly,  on  the  12th  of  October,  in  the  Fifth 
Private  Congregation,  I  offered  the  following  decree, 


108  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

in  the  hope  that  thereafter,  at  least,  business  might 
go  on  in  a  better  way : 

"It  has  pleased  the  fathers  that  the  decrees  lo 
be  passed  in  this  Council  be  offered  drawn  up  in  the 
form  of  Synodic  decrees,  and  that  the  sense  of  the 
fathers  of  each  province  be  called  for,  in  the  order  of 
consecration  in  that  province.  Furthermore,  it  has 
pleased  them  that  mitred  abbots  be  interrogated  at 
the  same  time  with  the  bishops  in  whose  provinces 
their  monasteries  are  situated,  although  their  votes 
are  not  to  be  taken.  The  votes  of  the  fathers,  as 
soon  as  given,  after  the  statement  of  their  reason  (if 
they   wish    to    sustain  that    reason    by  showing   the 

grounds  thereof)  shall  be  immediately  recorded  by 
the  secretaries 

The  reason  of  the  decree  thus  offered  was  two- 
fold. I  wished  that  in  voting  the  fathers  might 
distinctly  know  what  the  question  was — which,  I 
thought,  had  not  always  happened  in  previous  con- 
gregations. 

Since  the  abbots  had  only  an  advisory  voice,  I 
wanted  the  bishops  to  be  interrogated  by  provinces, 
and  that  after  the  bishops  of  each  province,  the  ab- 
bots should  manifest  then-  views;  so  that  those  whose 
votes  were  still  to  be  given  might  have  the  opportu- 
nity of  knowing  what  the  abbots  thought.  For  what 
was  the  use  of  inviting  them  to  the  Council,  if  they 
were  not  to  be  allowed  to  express  then-  opinion  until 
after  all  the  bishops  had  voted,  when  they  could  be 
of  no  use  either  to  themselves  or  to  anybody  else  ? 

The  proposed  decree  was  rejected,  twelve  yeas  to 


SPEECH   OF   AECHBISHOP   KENRICK.       169 

thirty-two  nays ;  either  because  the  matter  was  not 
well  understood,  or  because  the  apostolic  legate 
vehemently  objected  to  it,  and  they  did  not  like  to 
displease  him:  or  (as  I  think  likely)  because  they 
had  no  hope  that  it  would  improve  the  course  of 
business,  and  were  unwilling  to  be  compelled  to 
remain  longer  away  from  their  dioceses  for  no  real 
advantage. 

I  then  offered  an  exception  which  I  had  brought 
with  me  in  writing,  (foreseeing  that  the  decree  which 
I  had  proposed  would  not  pass,)  in  the  following  or 
like  terms : 

"  The  undersigned,  archbishop  of  St.  Louis,  takes 
exception  against  all  decrees  passed  or  that  may  be 
passed  in  the  present  Council,  which  shall  not  have 
been  drawn  up  in  conciliar  form  and  distinctly  read 
to  the  fathers,  and  approved  by  a  majority  vote. 
PETER  RICHARD  KENRICK, 

Archbishop  of  St.  Louis. 

In  offering  this  exception,  I  said  that  in  order  to 
avoid  scandal  to  the  faithful,  I  would  sign  the  de- 
crees, if  that  exception  was  recorded  in  the  Acts  of 
the  Council,  otherwise  not.  After  some  objection, 
on  the  part  of  the  apostolic  legate,  to  the  wording  of 
the  exception  in  the  form  in  which  I  first  offered  it, 
he  consented  to  my  request.  But  inasmuch  as  no 
change  was  made  in  the  mode  of  transacting  busi- 
ness in  the  Council,  I  abstained  thenceforth  from 
voting,  except  once  or  twice  when  my  opinion  was 
called  for. 

In  the  published  acts  of  the  Council  my  excep- 

Vatican  Council.  O 


170  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

tion  is  not  to  be  found — whether  the  apostolic  legate 
had  allowed  himself  this  liberty,  or  whether,  perad- 
venture,  he  had  been  advised  to  it  from  higher  quar- 
ters. For  in  the  Acts,  after  it  is  reported  that  the 
decree  offered  by  me  was  rejected,  the  record  reads 
thus  : 

"  The  metropolitan  of  St.  Louis  offered  a  protest 
which  the  most  reverend  apostolic  legate  ordered  to 
be  reported  in  the  Acts,  and  which  has  been  trans- 
mitted with  them  to  the  holy  pontiff,  p.  72." 

In  this  way  it  has  been  brought  about  that  the 
exception  itself  has  been  omitted,  and  T  am  made  to 
appear  as  taking  exception  to  the  rejection  of  the 
decree  which  I  had  proposed,  which  would  have 
been  too  ridiculous;  when  my  exception  was  against 
the  method  of  transacting  business,  which  seemed  to 
me  not  conciliar.  My  complaint  is  that  the  faith 
pledged  to  me  was  not  kept.  The  Acts  ought  either 
to  have  been  suppressed,  or  to  have  been  given 
entire. 


SPEECH  OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENKICK.       171 


APPENDIX  B. 

[SEE  PAGE  164.] 

Out  of  the  four  committees,  only  that  which  is 
called  the  Committee  on  the  Faith  [Deputatio  de 
Fide]  has  thus  far  clone  anything  in  the  Council.  It 
is  composed  of  twenty-four  bishops,  elected  by  the 
Council.  Some  days  before  the  election,  printed 
lithograph  tickets,  headed  with  the  inscription,  "In 
Honor  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  of  the  Immaculate  Con- 
ception" were  distributed  among  the  fathers,  the 
name  of  His  Eminence  Cardinal  De  Angelis  being 
quoted  by  the  persons  who  ran  these  tickets,  in  a 
sort  of  recommendation  of  them.  The  bishops  put 
in  nomination  by  the  pious  getters-up  of  these  tick- 
ets were  almost  to  a  man  selected  from  those  who 
were. known  not  to  be  opposed  to  the  definition  of 
papal  infallibility. 

According  to  the  Apostolic  Constitution  Midtipli- 
ces  inter,  the  duty  of  the  committees  was  this:  In 
case  the  schemata  first  presented  were  either  unac- 
ceptable to  the  fathers,  or  in  want  of  some  correc- 
tion on  which  the  fathers  in  general  congregation 
could  not  agree,  they  were  to  be  recommitted  to  the 
committee  either  for  correction  or  for  reconstruction, 
in  view  of  the  remarks  of  the  fathers  upon  it.  In 
the  General  Congregation  itself,  the  committee  had 
no  duty  intrusted  to  it,  although  its  individual  mem- 
bers were  at  liberty  to  express  their  own  views, 
speaking  each  for  himself  and  not  for  the  committee. 


172  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

Of  the  committee's  method  of  doing  business  in 
its  own  meetings, .  I  cannot  speak  with  certainty. 
But  I  have  heard  that  when  the  question  was  on 
reconstructing  the  first  schema  De  Fide,  the  work 
of  preparing  the  new  draft  was  committed  by  the 
others  to  three  bishops,  who  were  undoubtedly  aided 
in  their  work  by  the  advising  theologians  of  the  com- 
mittee. So  that  it  is  not  very  rash  to  suppose  that 
the  work  of  reconstruction  was,  at  least  mainly,  to 
be  referred  to  those  theologians.  Doubtless  the  rest 
gave  their  approval;  and  perhaps  they  had  some 
share  in  the  work. 

As  to  the  committee's  way  of  doing  business  in 
the  Council  itself,  I  can  speak  with  more  confidence. 
It  was  on  this  wise:  In  every  other  deliberative 
assembly,  the  committee,  after  reporting  the  amend- 
ed bill,  has  nothing  more  to  do  in  the  assembly,  ex- 
cept, as  has  already  been  said,  that  the  individuals 
of  the  committee  are  to  state  their  views  and  give 
their  votes  just  like  other  members  of  the  body. 
Just  the  contrary  has  been  done.  By  virtue  of  the 
ninth  rule  of  the  Decree,  uttered  in  the  month  of 
February — not  by  the  Council,  but  by  the  pope — it 
was  permitted  to  any  member  of  the  committee  to 
take  the  floor  in  answer  to  objections  against  the 
schema,  either  on  the  day  they  were  offered,  or  on 
the  next  day.  So  it  has  come  about  that  ahnost 
every  day,  at  the  beginning  of  the  General  Congre- 
gation, some  one  of  the  fathers  of  the  committee, 
not  in  his  own  name,  but  in  that  of  the  committee,  is 
accustomed  to  make  a  speech  under  the  pretext  of 


SPEECH   OF   ARCHBISHOP   KENRICK.      173 

replying  to  objections,  (though  these  very  rarely  are 
replied  to,)  but  as  a  matter  of  fact,  in  hopes  of  help- 
ing on  the  schema  by  arguments  from  every  quarter, 
and  so  of  lessening  the  force  of  the  objections  by 
making  a  show  of  them  to  the  unwary,  as  if  they  had 
been  answered.  Before  reaching  the  preliminary 
voting,  when  the  question  was  to  be  taken  on  the 
several  amendments  offered  by  some  of  the  bishops, 
one  of  the  bishops  of  the  committee,  called  the  rela- 
tor, mounts  the  platform  to  inform  the  fathers  what 
the  committee  thinks  of  this  and  that  amendment; 
adding  after  each  amendment  the  words:  "This 
amendment  the  committee  accepts,"  or  "  rejects,"  or 
"thinks  that  with  some  verbal  changes  it  may  be 
accepted."  After  this  "relation"  has  been  finished, 
the  reverend  monsignor  the  sub-secretary  of  the 
Council  puts  the  amendments  to  vote  separately 
(giving  the  number  of  the  amendment,  and  announ- 
cing the  first  words  of  it  in  this  fashion :  "  This 
amendment  is  accepted  by  tlue  committee"  or  "is  reject- 
ed" or  "is  thus  modified.  All  those  who  are  in  favor 
of  adopting  it  will  rise;"  then,  "All  those  who  are 
in  favor  of  rejecting  it  will  rise."  It  has  always 
happened  that  the  fathers  have  voted  in  agreement 
with  the  views  of  the  committee.  On  the  first  day 
of  the  voting,  when  the  question  was  taken  on  the 
third  part  of  the  first  amendment,  the  signal  not  hav- 
ing yet  been  used  by  the  sub-secretary  as  it  has  constant- 
ly been  since,  &  large  number  of  persons  rose,  so  that 
those  standing  had  to  be  counted  in  order  to  come  at 
the  vote.     Then  there  began  to  be  a  great  confusion, 


174  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

and  the  amendment,  although  perhaps  adopted  by 
the  majority,  was  postponed  till  the  next  day.  When 
the  next  day  came,  the  right  reverend  relator  warned 
the  fathers  from  the  platform  that  the  committee 
would  not  accept  that  amendment.  At  once,  almost 
all  voted  by  rising  to  reject  it;  only  a  few  (as  it 
commonly  happens  in  such  circumstances)  voting  to 
adopt  it,  and  that  rather  to  show  their  own  mind 
than  with  the  hope  of  accomplishing  anything. 

Thus,  in  point  of  fact,  the  committee  is  the  Coun- 
cil. The  Council  hangs  upon  its  nod,  and  follows  its 
dictation  in  everything.  The  committee,  in  turn,  is 
governed  by  the  theologians,  in  this  sense,  at  least, 
that  it  makes  their  will  its  own. 

In  a  speech  lately  made  by  one  of  the  right  rev- 
erend relators,  Liberal  Catholics  are  numbered  among 
the  enemies  of  the  Holy  See;  although  the  relator 
himself — who  belongs  to  a  race  who  for  six  hundred 
years  have,  till  now,  been  impatient  of  slavery — well 
knew  that  there  were  some  among  the  bishops  who 
go  by  that  name  because  they  believe  that  there  is 
some  middle  course  to  be  found  between  absolutism 
and  utter  license. 


PllETENDED    "SPEECH   OF  A  BISHOP."    175 


CHAPTEK  VIII. 

PRETENDED   "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP  IN 
THE  COUNCIL." 

Soon  after  the  close  of  the  Council,  a  little  pamphlet 
was  widely  circulated  in  Italy,  under  the  title,  "  The 
Speech  of  a  Bishop  in  the  Vatican  Council"  It  was  so 
bold  and  fearless  in  its  tone  and  temper,  that  its  genu- 
ineness was  doubted  by  many  of  those  who  knew  the 
intolerance  of  free  speech  on  the  part  of  the  majority 
in  the  Council,  and  the  arbitrary  use  of  the  president's 
bell.  Nevertheless,  by  many  eminent  Koman-catholics 
in  Europe,  who  knew  of  the  extraordinary  boldness, 
both  of  thought  and  speech,  exhibited  in  the  Council 
by  the  Croat  bishop,  Strossmayer,  and  the  violent  clam- 
ors which  he  had  resolutely  faced,  it  was  believed  to 
be  the  genuine  speech  of  that  great  Latin  orator ;  and 
as  such  was  published  in  America  in  an  English  trans- 
lation. Subsequently  it  was  disavowed  in  the  name  of 
Strossmayer,  and  the  disavowal  was  promptly  given  to 
the  public  through  the  same  journals  which  had  circu- 
lated the  speech. 

We  print  this  document  here  as  apocryphal  indeed, 
but  as  a  part  of  the  literature  relating  to  the  Council, 
and  an  effective  argument  on  the  main  question  before 
that  body  ;  while  we  reprobate  the  false  pretence  under 

which  it  was  originally  published.* 
> 

*  It  is  only  fair  to  remember  that  the  writer,  as  a  Koman-cath- 
olic,  had  been  trained  in  a  system  which  justifies  such  things.  See 
above,  pp,  7,  8,  10.  Many  of  what  are  charged  as  "Protestant 
frauds  "  have  a  Komish  origin  ;  e.  g.,  the  Pope  Joan  story  and  the 
"Secret  Instructions  of  the  Jesuits." 


17G  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

Venerable  Fathers  and  Brethren  :  It  is  not  without 
some  tremors,  although  with  a  conscience  free  and 
tranquil  before  the  living  and  heart-searching  God, 
that  I  rise  to  address  this  august  assembly. 

Sitting  here  among  you,  I  have  followed  with  close 
attention  all  the  ;ul<livsses  made  in  this  hall,  witli  fer- 
vent longings  that  some  ray  of  light  from  above  might 
illumine  the  eyes  of  my  understanding,  and  qualify  me 
to  vote  on  the  canons  of  this  holy  (Ecumenical  Council 
with  a  perfect  comprehension  of  the  case. 

Impressed  by  the  responsibilities  resting  upon  me, 
and  for  which  God  will  call  me  to  account,  I  have 
devoted  myself  with  the  most  serious  attention  to 
studying  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  N- 
ments,  demanding  of  these  venerable  monuments  of 
the  truth  to  inform  me  whether  the  holy  pontiff  who 
presides  over  us  is  really  the  successor  of  St.  Peter,  the 
vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  infallible  teacher  of  the 
church. 

To  solve  this  grave  question,  I  have  had  to  turn 
away  from  the  existing  state  of  things,  and  with  the 
gospel  torch  in  hand  to  transport  myself  mentally  to 
the  time  when  neither  gallicanism  nor  ultramontanism 
was  known ;  when  the  church  had  for  teachers  St. 
Paul  and  St.  Peter,  St.  James  and  St.  John  —  teachers 
whose  divine  authentication  we  cannot  deny  without 
calling  in  question  what  is  taught  by  the  Holy  Bible, 
which  here  lies  before  me,  and  which  the  Council  of 
Trent  has  proclaimed  the  "rule  of  faith  and  of 
practice." 

TESTIMONY  OF  GOD'S  WOKD. 

I  open,  then,  these  sacred  pages.  But  what !  shall 
I  dare  to  tell  it  ?  I  find  in  them  nothing  to  justify,  how- 
ever remotely,  the  ultramontane  view.     Nay,  more  ;  to 


PRETENDED    "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."     171 

my  utter  astonishment,  I  find  nothing  said  about  a 
pope,  successor  of  St.  Peter  and  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ, 
any  more  than  about  a  successor  of  Mohammed,  who 
was  not  then  in  existence. 

Yes,  Archbishop  Manning,  you  will  say  that  I  blas- 
pheme ;  and  you,  Bishop  Pie,  that  I  am  out  of  my 
senses.  No,  no,  my  lord  bishops,  I  am  not  blasphe- 
ming ;  I  am  not  beside  myself.  But  now,  unless  I  have 
failed  of  reading  the  New  Testament  from  beginning  to 
end,  I  declare  to  you  before  God,  lifting  my  hand  tow- 
ards yonder  great  crucifix,  that  I  find  in  its  pages  no 

TRACE  OF  THE  PAPACY  aS  it  UOW  exists. 

Do  not  refuse  to  listen  to  me,  venerable  brethren. 
Do  not  by  your  murmurs  and  interruptions  justify 
those  who  declare,  with  Father  Hyacinthe,  that  this 
Council  is  not  free,  but  that  our  votes  are  imposed 
upon  us  in  advance.  If  this  were  so,  this  august 
assembly,  towards  which  the  eyes  of  the  whole  world 
are  turned,  would  fall  into  the  most  shameful  contempt. 
If  we  would  be  great,  we  must  be  free. 

Reading,  then,  the  Scriptures,  with  such  attention 
as  the  Lord  has  made  me  capable  of,  I  have  not  found 
in  them  a  single  chapter,  a  single  verse,  in  which  Jesus 
Christ  commits  to  St.  Peter  lordship  over  the  apostles, 
his  fellow-laborers. 

If  Simon,  son  of  Jonas,  had  been  appointed  to  be 
what  we  understand  His  Holiness  Pius  IX.  to  be  in 
our  time,  it  is  astonishing  that  Christ  did  not  say  to 
the  apostles,  "  When  I  am  ascended  up  to  my  Father, 
ye  shall  all  obey  Simon  Peter  as  ye  have  obeyed  me.  I 
appoint  him  my  vicar  upon  earth." 

Not  only  is  Christ  silent  on  this  point,  but  he  has 
so  little  thought  of  giving  the  church  a  chief,  that  when 
he  is  promising  thrones  to  his  apostles,  to  judge  the 

8* 


178  THE  VATICAN  COUNCIL. 

twelve  tribes  of  Israel,  he  promises  twelve  of  them — 
one  apiece — without  saying  that  one  is  to  be  higher 
than  the  rest,  and  is  to  belong  to  Peter.  Matt.  19 :  28. 
Surely,  if  he  had  wished  this  to  be  so,  he  would  have 
said  so.  What  must  we  infer  from  his  silence  ?  Logic 
tells  us  :  Christ  did  not  intend  to  make  Peter  chief  of 
the  apostolic  college. 

When  Christ  sent  forth  the  apostles  to  the  conquest 
of  the  world,  he  gave  to  all  alike  the  power  of  binding  and 
loosing ;  to  all,  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Let 
me  repeat  it :  if  he  had  meant  to  make  Peter  his  vicar, 
he  would  have  appointed  him  commander-in-chief  of 
his  spiritual  army. 

Christ,  says  the  Scriptures,  forbade  Peter  and  his 
colleagues  to  have  rule  and  lordship  and  power  over 
believers,  like  the  princes  of  the  Gentiles.  Luke  22 :  25. 
If  Peter  had  been  made  pope,  Jesus  would  not  have 
spoken  thus ;  for,  according  to  our  traditions,  the 
papacy  holds  in  its  hands  two  swords,  the  symbols  of 
spiritual  and  of  temporal  power. 

One  fact  has  profoundly  impressed  me.  When  I 
observed  it,  I  said  to  myself  :  If  Peter  had  been  pope, 
would  his  colleagues  have  suffered  themselves  to  send 
him  with  St.  John  to  Samaria  to  preach  the  gospel  of 
the  Son  of  God?     Acts  8:14. 

What  would  you  think,  venerable  brethren,  if  at 
tins  moment  we  were  to  permit  ourselves  to  depute  His 
Holiness  Pius  IX.  and  His  Eminence  Monsignor  Plan- 
tier  to  betake  themselves  to  the  patriarch  of  Constan- 
tinople, and  adjure  him  to  put  an  end  to  the  Eastern 
schism  ? 

But  here  is  another  fact  of  greater  importance  still. 
An  oecumenical  council  was  assembled  at  Jerusalem  to 
decide  on  questions  on  which  believers  were  divided. 


PKETENDED    "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."     179 

"Who  would  have  convoked  this  council  if  St.  Peter  had 
been  pope?  St.  Peter.  Who  would  have  presided 
over  it  ?  St.  Peter  or  his  legates.  Who  would  have 
formulated  and  promulgated  its  canons?  St.  Peter. 
"Well,  now,  nothing  of  the  kind  took  place.  The  apostle 
was  present  at  the  council,  like  all  his  colleagues.  But 
it  was  not  he  who  framed  its  conclusions,  but  St. 
James ;  and  when  its  decrees  were  promulgated,  this 
was  done  in  the  name  of  "the  apostles,  the  elders,  and 
the  brethren."  Acts  15.  Is  this  the  way  we  manage 
things  in  our  church  ? 

The  deeper  I  go,  my  venerable  brethren,  in  my 
examination,  the  more  I  am  convinced  that  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures  there  is  no  appearance  of  the  primacy 
of  the  son  of  Jonas. 

"While  we  teach  that  the  church  is  built  on  St.  Peter, 
St.  Paul,  whose  authority  cannot  be  questioned,  tells 
us  in  his  epistle  to  the  Ephesians  (2:20)  that  it  is 
"  built  upon  the  foundation  of  the  apostles  and  proph- 
ets, Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner-stone." 
The  same  apostle  is  so  far  from  believing  in  the 
supremacy  of  Peter,  that  he  openly  rebukes  those  who 
say,  "I  am  of  Paul  and  I  of  Apollos,"  1  Cor.  1:12,  in 
the  same  terms  as  those  who  would  say,  "I  am  of 
Peter."  If,  then,  the  latter  apostle  was  vicar  of  Jesus 
Christ,  St.  Paul  would  have  taken  good  care  not  to 
censure  so  violently  those  who  held  to  his  colleague. 

The  same  apostle  Paul,  enumerating  the  offices  of 
the  church,  mentions  apostles,  prophets,  evangelists, 
pastors,  and  teachers.  Is  it  credible,  venerable  breth- 
ren, that  St.  Paul,  the  great  teacher  of  the  Gentiles, 
would  have  left  out  the  greatest  of  all  the  offices — the 
papacy — if  the  papacy  had  been  founded  by  divine 
institution  ?     It  seems  to  me  that  this  omission  would 


180  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

have  been  no  more  possible  than  a  history  of  this  coun- 
cil that  should  make  no  mention  whatever  of  His 
Holiness  Pius  IX. 

The  apostle  Paul  in  not  one  of  his  letters  addri 
to  the  various  churches  makes  ;iny  mention  of  the 
primacy  of  Peter.  If  this  primacy  had  exist  d  ;  if,  in 
short,  the  church  bad  had  a  supreme  head,  infallible  in 
teaching,  would  the  great  teacher  of  the  Gentiles  have 
omitted  all  mention  of  it  ?  Nay.  He  would  have  writ- 
ten a  long  epistle  on  this  important,  this  vital  subject. 
"When,  therefore,  he  is  rearing  the  edifice  of  Christian 
doctrine,  is  it  possible  that  he  leaves  out  the  foundation 
and  the  key-stone?  Now,  unless  the  apostolic  church 
is  to  be  reckoned  heretical,  which  we  neither  wish  nor 
dare  to  say,  we  are  constrained  to  acknowledge  that 
the  church  has  never  been  more  fair,  more  pure,  nor 
more  holy,  than  in  the  days  when  it  had  no  pope. 

My  lord  bishop  of  Laval  cannot  contradict  this  ;  for 
if  any  of  you,  venerable  brethren,  should  dare  to  think 
that  the  church  which  at  this  day  has  a  pope  for  its 
head  is  stronger  in  the  faith,  or  purer  in  morals,  than 
the  apostolic  church,  he  must  say  it  openly  in  the  face 
of  the  world ;  for  this  room  is  the  centre  from  which 
our  words  fly  from  pole  to  pole. 

I  proceed  :  Not  in  the  writings  of  St.  Paul,  nor  in 
those  of  St.  John  or  St.  James,  have  I  found  any  trace 
or  germ  of  the  papal  power.  St.  Luke,  the  historian 
of  the  missionary  labors  of  the  apostles,  is  silent  on 
this  vital  point.  The  silence  of  these  holy  men,  whose 
writings  are  part  of  the  canon  of  the  inspired  Scrip- 
tures, is  as  inexplicable,  if  Peter  had  been  pope,  as  that 
of  Thiers  would  have  been,  if  he  had  omitted  the  title 
of  Emperor  in  writing  the  history  of  Naj)oleon  Bona- 
parte. 


PRETENDED    "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."     181 

But  the  tiling  which  astounds  me  beyond  all  expres- 
sion is  the  silence  of  Peter  himself.  If  he  had  been 
what  we  say — the  vicar  of  Christ  upon  earth — he  must 
have  known  it.  If  he  knew  it,  how  does  it#happen 
that  he  never  once — not  one  solitary  time — acted  as 
pope  ?  He  might  have  done  it  on  the  day  of  Pentecost, 
when  he  pronounced  his  first  discourse  ;  but  he  did 
not.  He  might  have  done  it  at  the  Council  of  Jerusa- 
lem ;  but  he  did  not.  He  might  have  done  it  at  Anti- 
och ;  but  he  did  not.  He  might  have  done  it  in  his 
two  epistles  to  the  churches  ;  but  he  did  not.  Can  you 
imagine  such  a  pope  as  this,  O  my  venerable  breth- 
ren? 

If,  then,  we  would  maintain  that  Peter  was  pope,  it 
necessarily  follows  that  we  must  maintain  that  he  was 
not  aware  of  it  at  the  time.  I  put  it  to  any  man  with 
a  head  to  think  and  a  mind  to  reflect,  whether  these 
two  suppositions  are  credible. 

To  sum  up,  then  :  During  the  lifetime  of  the  apos- 
tles, the  church  never  thought  of  the  possibility  of  a 
pope.  To  maintain  the  contrary,  it  would  be  necessary 
to  put  the  Holy  Scriptures  into  the  fire  or  out  of  the 
mind. 

But  the  question  is  asked,  "Was  not  St.  Peter  at 
Rome?  Was  he  not  crucified  here  head  downward? 
The  chair  from  which  he  taught,  the  altar  at  which  he 
said  mass,  are  they  not  in  this  Eternal  City  ? 

Venerable  brethren,  the  sojourn  of  St.  Peter  at 
Rome  has  no  other  proof  than  tradition.  But  even  if 
he  was  bishop  of  Rome,  what  argument  can  be  drawn 
from  his  episcopate  here  to  prove  his  supremacy?  A 
scholar  of  the  highest  rank,  Scaliger,  has  not  hesitated 
to  say  that  the  episcopate  and  sojourn  of  St.  Peter  at 
Rome  must  be  classed  amon^r  ridiculous  legends. 


182  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

CHURCH  HISTOEY. 

But,  venerable  sirs,  we  have  one  dictator  before 
which  we  all,  even  Kis  Holiness  Pius  IX.,  must  needs 
bow  the  head  in  silence.     This  dictator  is  history. 

History  is  not  like  the  legends,  which  one  can  mould 
at  his  pleasure  as  the  potter  moulds  clay  ;  it  is  the  dia- 
mond, cutting  on  the  glass  words  that  cannot  be  can- 
celled. Thus  far  I  have  relied  solely  on  the  facts  of 
sacred  history ;  and  if  I  have  found  no  trace  of  the 
papacy  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  the  fault  is  not 
mine  but  history's.  Do  you  wish  to  arraign  me  on  a 
charge  of  falsehood  ?     You  are  welcome  to  do  so. 

Finding  no  trace  of  tin-  papacy  in  the  apostolic  rec- 
ords, I  said  to  myself,  "I  shall  find  what  I  am  seeking 
in  the  annals  of  the  church."  Well,  I  will  say  it  frank- 
ly :  I  have  searched  for  a  pope  through  the  first  three 
centuries,  and  have  not  found  one. 

No  one  of  you,  I  hope,  will  question  the  authority 
of  the  holy  bishop  of  Hippo,  the  great  and  blessed  St. 
Augustine.  #This  pious  doctor,  the  honor  and  glory  of 
the  catholic  church,  was  secretary  of  the  Council  of 
Milevio.  In  the  decrees  of  that  venerable  assembly 
we  read  these  significant  words  :  "Whoever  shall  wish 
to  appeal  to  the  bishop  across  the  sea,  shall  not  be 
received  to  the  communion  by  any  one  in  Africa."  The 
African  bishops  were  so  far  from  recognizing  any 
supremacy  of  the  bishop  of  Rome,  that  they  judged 
worthy  of  excommunication  all  who  had  recourse  to 
him  by  appeal. 

These  same  bishops,  in  the  sixth  Council  of  Car- 
thage, held  under  Aurelius,  bishop  of  that  city,  wrote 
to  Celestine,  bishop  of  Eome,  giving  him  notice  that 
he  should  not  receive  appeals  from  bishops,  priests,  or 
clergy  of  Africa  ;  that  he  should  send  thither  neither 


PKETENDED  "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."    183 

legates  nor  commissioners ;   and  that  he  should  not 
bring  human  pride  into  the  church. 

That  the  patriarch  of  Rome  very  early  formed  the 
design  to  gain  for  himself  supreme  authority  is  evi- 
dent, but  it  is  equally  evident  that  he  did  not  then  pos- 
sess the  supremacy  which  the  ultramontanists  ascribe 
to  him  ;  for  if  he  had,  how  would  the  African  bishops, 
and  Augustine,  above  all,  have  dared  to  prohibit  ap- 
peals from  their  own  decrees  to  his  supreme  tribunal  ? 

I  readily  acknowledge  that  the  patriarchate  of  Eome ; 
held  the  most  prominent  position.     A  law  of  Justinian  \ 
says  :  "  We  ordain,  according  to  the  definitions  of  the  i 
four  councils,  thaj:  the  most  holy  father  of  ancient  \ 
Rome  be  the  first  among  the  bishops ;  and  that  the  J 
most  exalted  archbishop  of  Constantinople,  the  new 
Rome,  be  the  second." 

You  will  say  to  me,  "  Then  bow  down  to  the  su- 
premacy of  the  pope."  But,  venerable  brethren,  rush 
not  so  hastily  to  this  conclusion  ;  for  this  law  of  Jus- 
tinian bears  inscribed  at  its  head,  "  Concerning  the 
order  of  the  sees  of  the  patriarchs."  Now  precedence  isl 
one  thing,  and  power  of  jurisdiction  is  another.  Thus, J 
for  example,  let  us  suppose  there  was  an  assembly  in 
Florence  of  all  the  bishops  of  this  kingdom  ;  the  prece- 
dence would  be  given  to  the  primate  of  Florence,  as 
among  the  Orientals  it  is  assigned  to  the  patriarch  of 
Constantinople,  and  in  England  to  the  archbishop  of 
Canterbury.  But  neither  the  first,  the  second,  nor  the 
third  could  claim,  from  the  position  assigned  to  him, 
any  jurisdiction  over  his  colleagues. 

The  precedence  of  the  Roman  bishops  was  derived/ 
not  from  divine  right,  but  from  the  importance  of  the\ 
city  in  which  they  were  established.     My  lord  Darboyy 
of  Paris  is  not  superior  in  dignity  to  the  archbishop  of 


184  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

Avignon  ;  and  yet  Paris  secures  for  him  a  considera- 
tion lie  would  not  possess  if  Lis  palace  were  on  the 
banks  of  the  Rhone  instead  of  the  Seine.  "What  is  true 
in  the  religious  order  is  also  true  in  the  civil  and  polit- 
ical order.  The  prefect  of  Florence  is  no  more  really 
a  prefect  than  he  of  Pisa,  but  civilly  and  politically  he 
has  greater  influence. 

I  have  said  that  from  the  first  centuries  the  patri- 
arch of  Rome  aspired  to  the  universal  government  of 
tin  el  lurch.  Unhappily  he  succeeded  ere  long;  but 
he  had  not  then  attained  his  object,  for,  notwithstand- 
ing his  claims,  the  emperor  Theodosius  II.  made  a  law 
by  which  he  ordained  that  the  patriarch  of  Constanti- 
nople had  the  same  authority  as  the  patriarch  of  Rome. 
Leg.  < 

The  fathers  of  the  Council  of  Chalcedon  placed  the 
bishops  of  the  "old"  and  the  "new"  Rome  in  the 
same  order  in  all  things,  even  in  ecclesiastical  matters. 
Can,  28. 

The  sixth  Council  of  Carthage  prohibited  all  bishops 
from  taking  the  title  of  "chief  of  the  bishops,"  or 
"  supreme  bishop." 

As  to  the  title  of  "universal  bishop,"  which  the 
popes  at  a  later  day  assumed,  St.  Gregory  I.,  believing 
that  his  successors  would  never  embellish  their  names 
with  it,  put  on  record  these  notable  words  :  "  Not  one 
of  my  predecessors  has  consented  to  take  this  profane 
title,  because,  when  one  patriarch  assumes  for  himself 
the  title  of  universal,  the  name  of  patriarch  suffers  dis- 
credit. Far,  then,  from  every  Christian  be  the  desire 
to  give  himself  a  title  which  reflects  discredit  upon  his 
brethren." 

The  words  of  St.  Gregory  were  intended  for  his 
colleague  at  Constantinople,  who  claimed  the  primacy 


PRETENDED   "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."     1S5 

of  the  church.  Pope  Pelagius  II.  calls  John,  the 
bishop  of  Constantinople,  who  aspired  to  the  supreme 
pontificate,  "impious"  and  "profane."  "Do  not  re- 
gard," says  he,  "  the  title  of  universal,  which  John  has 
unlawfully  assumed.  Let  no  one  of  the  patriarchs  take 
this  profane  title ;  for  what  misfortunes  must  we  not 
expect,  if  such  elements  arise  among  the  priests?  It 
would  be  a  fulfilment  of  what  has  been  predicted  :  '  He 
is  the  king  of  the  sons  of  pride.'  "  (Pelagius  II.,  let- 
ter 13.) 

Do  not  these  authorities  (and  I  have  a  hundred 
more  just  as  strong)  prove,  as  clear  as  the  sun  at  noon- 
day, that  it  was  not  until  a  very  late  date  that  the 
bishops  of  Eome  came  to  be  regarded  as  universal 
bishops  and  heads  of  the  church  ?  And,  on  the  other 
hand,  who  does  not  know  that,  from  the  year  325,  in 
which  the  first  Council  of  Nice  was  held,  to  the  year 
580,  the  date  of  the  second  Council  of  Constantinople, 
out  of  the  1,109  bishops  who  attended  the  first  six 
councils,  only  19  were  occidental  bishops?  Who  is 
there  but  knows  that  Councils  were  convoked  by  the 
emperors,  without  consultation  with  the  bishop  of 
Eome,  and  sometimes  in  opposition  to  his  wishes  ? 
that  Hosius,  bishop  of  Cordova,  presided  in  the  first 
Council  of  Nice,  and  drew  up  its  canons?  The  same 
Hosius  presided  in  the  Council  of  Sardis,  to  the  exclu- 
sion of  the  legates  of  Julius,  bishop  of  Eome.  I  will 
not  press  this  farther,  venerable  brethren,  but  pass  on 
to  the  great  argument  which  is  alleged  in  proof  of  the 
primacy  of  the  bishop  of  Eome. 

IS  PETER  THE   ROCK? 

By  the  rock  on  which  the  holy  church  was  built,  you 
understand  Peter.     If  this  were  true,  it  would  be  an 


186  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

end  to  the  dispute.  But  the  early  fathers,  who  must 
surely  have  known  something  about  it,  did  not  think 
as  we  do  on  this  point. 

St.  Cyril,  in  his  fourth  book  on  the  Trinity,  says  : 
"I  believe  that  by  the  rock  we  ftre  to  understand  the 
immovable  faith  of  the  apostle**  St.  Hilary,  bishop  of 
Poictiers,  in  his  second  book  on  the  Trinity,  says  : 
"  The  rock  is  the  blessed  and  sole  rock  of  the  faith,  con- 
i  by  the  mouth  of  St.  Peter ;"  and  adds,  in  his 
sixth  book  on  the  Trinity  :  "  It  is  upon  this  rock  of  the 
confession  that  the  church  is  built"  St.  Jerome,  in  his 
sixth  book  on  St.  Matthew,  says  :  "God  lias  founded 
his  church  upon  this  rock,  and  it  is  upon  this  rock  that 
the  apostle  Peter  received  his  name."  After  him, 
Clirysostom  says^  in  his  fifty-third  homily  0D  St.  "Mat- 
thew :  '"On  this  rock  will  I  build  my  church  ;'  that  is, 
on  the  faith  of  the  confession.  And  what  was  the 
apostle's  confession?  'Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
the  living  God.'"  Ambrose,  the  holy  archbishop  of 
Milan,  on  the  second  chapter  to  the  Ephesians,  St.  Ba- 
sil of  Seleucia,  and  the  fathers  of  the  Council  of  Chal- 
cedon,  teach  exactly  the  same  thing. 

Of  all  the  doctors  of  Christian  antiquity,  St.  Augus- 
tine is  the  one  who  holds  perhaps  the  first  place  for 
learning  and  piety.  Hear,  then,  what  he  writes  in  his 
second  treatise  on  the  first  epistle  of  John  :  "  What 
signify  the  words, '  On  this  rock  will  I  build  my  church '  ? 
On  that  faith,  on  that  which  is  said,  'Thou  art  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.' "  In  his  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty-fourth  treatise  on  St.  John  we  find 
this  most  significant  sentence  :  "  On  this  rock  which 
thou  hast  confessed,  I  will  build  my  church,  because 
Christ  was  the  rock." 

So  far  was  this  great  bishop  from  believing  that  the 


PRETENDED  ''SPEECH   OF  A  BISHOP."    187 

church  was  built  on  St.  Peter,  that  he  said  to  his  peo- 
ple in  his  thirteenth  sermon  :  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and  on 
this  rock  which  thou  hast  confessed — this  rock,  which 
thou  hast  acknowledged  in  declaring,  'Thou  art  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God' — I  will  build  my 
church  ;  on  myself,  in  that  I  am  the  Son  of  the  living- 
God,  will  I  build  it ;  on  me,  and  not  me  on  thee." 

St.  Augustine's  opinion  on  this  famous  text  was  the 
opinion  of  all  Christendom  in  his  day. 

To  sum  up,  then,  I  have  proved  : 

1.  That  Jesus  gave  to  all  the  apostles  the  same 
power  as  to  Peter. 

2.  That  the  apostles  never  recognized  Peter  as  the 
vicar  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the  infallible  teacher  of  the 
church. 

3.  That  Peter  never  thought  of  being  pope,  and 
never  acted  as  pope. 

4.  That  the  councils  of  the  first  four  centuries, 
while  acknowledging  the  high  dignity  of  the  bishop  of 
Rome,  conceded  to  him  only  a  preeminence  of  honor  ; 
never  of  power  or  jurisdiction. 

5.  That  the  holy  fathers,  in  the  famous  passage, 
"  Thou  art  Peter,  and  on  this  rock  will  I  build  my 
church,"  never  understood  that  the  church  was  built 
upon  Peter,  (super  Petrum,)  but  on  the  rock,  (super 
petram, )  that  is,  on  the  apostle's  confession  of  faith. 

I  conclude  triumphantly  with  history,  with  reason, 
with  logic,  with  common  sense,  and  with  Christian 
conscience,  that  Jesus  Christ  conferred  no  supremacy 
whatever  on  St.  Peter  ;  and  that  if  the  bishops  of  Rome 
have  come  to  be  sovereigns  of  the  church,  it  has  only 
been  by  the  process  of  confiscating,  one  by  one,  all  the 
rights  of  the  bishops. 

History  is  neither  Catholic,  nor  Anglican,  nor  Cal- 


188  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

vinist,  nor  Lutheran,  nor  Armenian,  nor  Schismatic- 
Greek,  nor  Ultramontane.  It  is  what  it  is  ;  thai  is,  it 
is  something  mightier  than  all  the  decrees  of  oecumeni- 
cal councils. 

You  may  write  falsely  against  it  if  you  dare ;  but 
you  can  no  more  destroy  it  than  you  can  throw  down 
the  Coliseum  by  pulling  out  a  brickbat  If  I  have  said 
anything  which  history  disproves,  confront  me  with 
history,  and  without  a  moment's  hesitation  I  will  make 
the  amende  honorable.  Bat  be  patient  awhile,  and  you 
will  find  that  I  have  not  yet  said  the  whole  of  what  I 
have  undertaken  to  say,  and  must  say.  If  the  stake 
were  waiting  for  me  out  on  the  great  square  of  St. 
Peter's,  I  could  not  be  silent  ;  I  should  be  bound  to 
go  on. 

FORMER  POPES  NOT    INFALLIBLE. 

Bishop  Dupanloup,  in  his  famous  Observations  on 
this  Vatican  Council,  has  said,  and  justly,  that  if  we 
declare  Pius  IX.  infallible,  we  are  bound,  as  a  natural 
and  necessary  inference,  to  hold  all  his  predecessors  as 
infallible.  "Well,  now,  my  venerable  brethren,  hear 
how  history  lifts  up  her  commanding  voice  to  assure 
you  that  some  popes  have  erred.  You  will  have  a  good 
time  protesting  and  denying,  I  promise  you,  in  the  face 
of  such  facts  as  these  : 

Pope  Victor,  a.  d.  192,  approved  Montanism,  and 
afterwards  condemned  it. 

Marcellinus,  a.  d.  296-303,  was  an  idolater.  He 
entered  the  temple  of  Vesta  and  offered  incense  to  that 
goddess.  It  was  an  act  of  weakness,  you  say ;  but  I 
reply,  a  vicar  of  Jesus  Christ  on  the  earth  may  die,  but 
does  not  apostatize. 

Liberius,  a.  d.  358,  consented  to  the  condemnation 


PKETENDED   "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."     189 

of  Anastasius,  and  professed  Arianism,  for  the  sake  of 
being  recalled  from  exile  and  reinstated  in  his  see. 

Honorius,  a.  d.  625,  adhered  to  monothelitism,  as 
Father  Gratry  has  fully  demonstrated. 

Gregory  I.,  a.  d.  578-590,  gives  the  name  antichrist 
to  any  one  who  assumes  the  title  universal  bishop  ;  and, 
on  the  other  hand,  Boniface  III.,  a.  d.  607,  obtains  this 
title  from  the  parricide  emperor  Phocas. 

Pascal  II.,  a.  d.  1088-99,  and  Eugenius  III.,  a.  d. 
1145-52,  authorized  duelling  ;  Julius  II.,  a.  d.  1509,  and 
Pius  IV.,  a.  d.  1560,  forbade  it. 

Eugenius  IV.,  a.  d.  1431-39,  approved  the  Council 
of  Basle  and  the  restoration  of  the  clialice  to  the 
Bohemian  church ;  Pius  II.,  a.  d.  1658,  revoked  this 
concession. 

Adrian  II.,  a.  d.  867-72,  declares  civil  marriage 
valid;  Pius  VII.,  a.  d.  1800-23,  condemns  it.  Sixtus 
V.,  a.  d.  1585-90,  publishes  an  edition  of  the  Bible,  and 
by  a  bull  recommends  its  perusal ;  which  Pius  VII. 
condemns. 

Clement  XIV.,  a.  d.  1700-21,  abolishes  the  order 
of  Jesuits,  allowed  by  Paul  III.  Pius  VII.  reestab- 
lishes it. 

But  why  resort  to  proofs  so  far  off  ?  Has  not  our 
holy  father  Pius  IX.,  here  present,  in  his  bull  prescri- 
bing rules  for  the  Council  in  case  he  should  die  during 
its  session,  revoked  everything  in  the  past  that  should 
contravene  his  decisions,  even  were  it  in  the  decisions 
of  his  predecessors  ?  And  certainly  if  Pius  IX.  has 
ever  spoken  ex  cathedra,  is  it  not  when  from  the  depths 
of  his  tomb  he  imposes  his  own  will  on  the  princes  of 
the  church  ? 

I  should  never  get  through,  venerable  brethren,  if  I 
were  to  lay  before  your  eyes  all  the  contradictions  of 


190  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

the  popes  in  their  teachings.  If,  then,  you  proclaim 
the  infallibility  of  the  present  pope,  you  will  be  forced 
either  to  prove  what  is  impossible!  that  the  popes  have 
not  contradicted  themselves,  or  to  declare  that  it  is 
revealed  to  you  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  papal  infalli- 
bility dates  only  from  the  year  1870.  AVill  you  have 
the  hardihood  to  do  this? 

The  public  may  perhaps  pass  by  with  indifference 
theological  questions,  the  importance  of  which  they  do 
not  apprehend.  But  however  indifferent  they  may  be 
to  principles,  they  are  not  at  all  indifferent  to  facte. 
Don't  be  deluded  !  If  you  decree  the  dogma  of  papal 
infallibility,  oftr  antagonist!  the  Protestants  will  leap 
into  the  breach  with  all  the  more  boldness,  for  the  fact 

that  they  will  have  history  on  their  side  and  again 
while  we  shall  have,  to  oppose  to  them,  nothing  but 
our  negations.      What  can  we  say  to  them,  when  they 
begin  to  parade  before  the  public  the  Hue  of  the  bishops 
of  Rome  from  Linus  down  to  His  Holiness  Pius  IX.  ? 

Oh,  if  they  had  all  been  such  as  Pius  IX.  we  could 
beat  them  all  along  the  line.  But,  alas,  alas !  it  is  very 
different  from  this ! 

Pope  Vigilius,  a.  d.  538,  bought  the  papacy  from 
Belisarius,  agent  of  the  emperor  Justinian  ;  though  to 
be  sure  he  broke  his  promise  and  paid  nothing.  Is 
this  mode  of  gaining  the  tiara  canonical  ?  The  second 
Council  of  Chalcedon  formally  condemned  it,  for  in  one 
of  its  canons  we  read:  "The  bishop  who  gains  his 
bishopric  by  bribes  must  lose  it  and  be  degraded." 

Pope  Eugenius  IV.,  a.  d.  1145,  imitated  Vigilius. 
St.  Bernard,  the  bright  star  of  that  century,  rebuked 
him  thus  :  "  Can  you  point  out  to  me  one  man  in  this 
great  city  of  Rome,  who  would  have  taken  you  as  pope 
unless  he  had  received  cither  gold  or  silver  ?"' 


PKETENDED   "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."     191 

Can  it  be,  venerable  brethren,  that  a  pope  who  sets 
up  his  money-changers'  table  at  the  temple  door  is 
inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost  ?  that  he  has  authority  to 
teach  the  church  infallibly  ? 

The  history  of  Formosus  you  know  too  well  to  need 
that  I  should  deepen  its  impression  on  you.  Stephen 
XI.  caused  his  body  to  be  disentombed,  clothed  with 
pontifical  robes,  and  cast  into  the  Tiber,  after  he  had 
cut  off  from  it  the  fingers  with  which  he  had  given  the 
benediction — pronouncing  him  perjured  and  illegiti- 
mate. He  was  himself  afterwards  imprisoned  by  the 
people,  poisoned,  and  strangled ;  but  behold  the  due 
revenges  of  time  :  Romanus,  the  successor  of  Stephen, 
and  after  him  John  X.,  reestablished  the  memory  of 
Formosus ! 

You  will  say,  "These  are  fictions,  not  history." 
Fictions,  my  lords !  Go  to  the  Vatican  library  and 
read  Plotinus,  the  historian  of  the  papacy,  and  the 
annals  of  Baronius,  a.  d.  897.  They  are  facts,  which  we 
would  gladly  cancel,  for  the  honor  of  the  Holy  See  ; 
but  when  the  question  is  on  the  decreeing  of  a  dogma 
which  may  occasion  a  great  schism  among  us,  the  love 
we  bear  to  our  venerable  mother  church — catholic, 
apostolic,  and  Roman — forbids  us  to  be  silent.  I 
proceed  : 

The  learned  cardinal  Baronius,  speaking  of  the 
papal  court,  says  (give  attention,  venerable  brethren,  to 
these  words)  :  "  What  was  the  aspect  of  Rome  at  that 
time,  and  how  opprobrious,  when  nobody  had  power 
at  Rome  but  all-prevalent  courtesans !  These  were  the 
persons  who  granted,  transferred,  took  away  bishop- 
rics ;  and,  horrible  to  believe,  their  lovers,  the  false 
popes,  came  to  be  placed  on  the  throne  of  St.  Peter." 
Baronius,  Anno  912. 


192  THE  VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

You.  reply,  "These  were  false  popes,  not  true." 
Very  well ;  but  in  that  case,  venerable  brethren,  if  for 
fifty  years  the  Roman  See  was  occupied  only  by  anti- 
popes,  where  will  you  find  the  thread  of  pontifical  suc- 
cession ?  Has  the  church  been  able  to  do  without  its 
chief  for  a  century  and  B  half,  and  go  headless  ?  Look 
at  it!  The  greater  part  of  these  anti-popes  figure  in 
the  genealogical  tree  of  the  papacy  ;  and  certainly  they 
must  have  been  such  men  as  Baroniufl  describes,  for 
Genebrardus,  the  great  flatterer  of  the  popes,  has 
dared  to  say  in  his  chronicles,  a.  d.  901,  "This  is  an 
unfortunate  age,  since  for  about  one  hundred  and  fifty 
years  the  popefl  have  entirely  fallen  away  from  the 
virtue  of  their  predecessors,  and  have  been  more  like 

apostate*  than  apostles." 

I  can  well  understand  how  the  face  of  the  illustrious 
Baronius  must  have  been  covered  with  blushes  at  nar- 
rating these  facts  about  the  Roman  bishops.  Speaking 
of  John  XL,  a.  d.  931,  bastard  son  of  Pope  Sergius 
and  Marozia,  he  wrote  these  words  in  his  annals  :  "The 
holy  church,  that  is,  the  Roman  church,  has  had  to  be 
trodden  under  foot  by  such  a  monster !"  And  John 
XII. ,  elected  pope  at  the  age  of  eighteen,  by  the  influ- 
ence of  courtesans,  was  no  whit  better  than  his  prede- 
cessor. 

Venerable  brethren,  I  deplore  the  necessity  of  stir- 
ring up  such  a  slough.  I  keep  silence  respecting 
Alexander  XL,  father  and  lover  of  Lucretia ;  and  I 
pass  by  John  XXII. ,  who  denied  the  immortality  of  the 
soul,  and  was  deposed  by  the  holy  (Ecumenical  Coun- 
cil of  Constance.  Some  assert  that  this  council  was  no 
more  than  a  provincial  council.  And  this  may  be  so  ; 
but  if  you  deny  it  all  authority,  to  be  logically  consis- 
tent, you  must  regard  the  nomination  of  Martin  T., 


PRETENDED   "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."     193 

a.  d.  1417,  as  illegitimate.  And  then,  what  will  become 
of  the  papal  succession  ?  "Will  you  be  able  to  find  its 
thread  ? 

I  make  no  mention  of  the  schisms  which  have  dis- 
honored the  church.  In  those  disgraceful  days  the 
Eoman  See  was  occupied  by  two  competitors,  and 
sometimes  by  three.  Which  of  these  was  the  true 
pope  ? 

To  sum  up,  then  :  If  you  declare  the  infallibility  of 
the  present  bishop  of  Rome,  you  will  be  held  bound  to 
prove  the  infallibility  of  all  his  predecessors,  without  a 
single  exception.  But  can  you  do  this,  with  history 
lying  open  and  showing  as  clear  as  sunshine  that  the 
popes  have  erred  in  their  teaching  ?  Can  you  do  it, 
and  maintain  that  popes  who  were  guilty  of  avarice,  of 
incest,  of  murder,  of  simony,  were  nevertheless  vicars 
of  Jesus  Christ  ?  Oh,  venerable  brethren,  to  maintain 
this  monstrous  thing  would  be  to  betray  Christ  worse 
than  Judas  did.  It  would  be  flinging  mud  in  his 
face! 

Believe  me,  venerable  brethren,  you  cannot  make 
history  over  again.  There  it  stands,  and  there  it  will 
stand  for  ever,  to  protest  mightily  against  the  dogma 
of  papal  infallibility.  You  may  proclaim  it  unanimous- 
ly, but  you  will  have  to  do  without  one  vote,  and  that 
is  mine. 

The  eyes  of  true  believers  are  upon  us  ;  they  look 
to  us  for  the  remedy  of  the  numberless  evils  by  which 
the  church  is  dishonored.  Shall  we  disappoint  their 
hopes?  What  account  could  we  give  to  God,  if  we 
should  let  slip  this  solemn  opportunity  which  he  has 
given  us  for  preserving  the  integrity  of  the  true  faith  ? 

Let  us  hold  it  fast,  my  brethren  ;  let  us  arm  our- 
selves with  a>holy  courage  ;  let  us  put  forth  one  mighty 

Vatican  Council.  9 


194  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

and  generous  effort ;  let  us  turn  to  the  teachings  of  the 
apostles,  for  aside  from  these  we  have  nothing  but 
error,  darkness,  and  false  tradition. 

Let  us  make  use  of  our  reason  and  understanding 
by  taking  the  apostles  and  the  prophets  as  our  sole 
infallible  teachers  on  that  greatest  of  all  questions, 
"What  shall  I  do  to  be  saved?"  This  being  decided, 
we  shall  have  got  the  foundation  laid  for  our  dogmatic 
system. 

Setting  our  feet  firmly  on  the  solid  and  chang< 
rock  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  inspired  of  God,  we  will  go 
boldly  forth  against   the  world,   and  like  the  ap 
Paul,  in  the  presence  of  the  free-thinkers,  we  will  know 
nothing  but  Jesus  Christ  and  him  erueilied.      AVe  will 
conquer  by  the  preaching  <>t'  the  I  ss  of  the 

cross,  as  Paul  conquere  I  the  orators  of  Greece  and 
Rome,  and  the  church  of  Rome  will  have  its  own 
glorious  '89 ! 

You  may  protest,  gentlemen,  and  cry  "Anathema!" 
but  you  know  perfectly  well  that  you  are  not  protesting 
against  me,  but  against  the  holy  apostles,  under  whose 
protection  I  would  that  this  Council  might  place  the 
church.  Ah,  if  bound  about  with  their  grave-clothes 
they  were  to  come  forth  from  their  sepulchres,  would 
they  speak  to  you  in  any  different  strain  from  mine  ? 

What  answer  will  you  make  them,  when  out  of  their 
writings  I  tell  you  that  the  papacy  has  departed  from 
that  gospel  of  the  Son  of  God  which  they  preached 
with  such  courage,  and  sealed  with  their  generous 
blood  ?  Will  you  have  the  hardihood  to  say  to  them  : 
"We  prefer  to  your  instructions  those  of  our  popes, 
our  Bellarmines,  our  Ignatius  Loyolas?  No,  no!  a 
thousand  times  no !  unless  you  have  closed  your  ears 
that  you  may  not  hear,  and  blinded  your  e$res  that  you 


PKETENDED  "SPEECH  OF  A  BISHOP."     195 

may  not  see,  and  made  gross  your  hearts  that  you  may 
not  understand. 

Ah,  if  He  who  sitteth  in  the  heavens  is  disposed  to 
make  heavy  his  hand  on  us,  as  once  on  Pharaoh,  he 
has  no  need  to  suffer  the  troops  of  Garibaldi  to  drive 
us  out  of  the  Eternal  City  ;  he  need  only  let  us  go  on 
to  make  Pius  IX.  a  god,  as  we  have  made  the  blessed 
Virgin  a  goddess. 

Pause,  oh,  pause,  my  venerable  brethren,  on  that 
hateful  and  absurd  declivity  on  which  you  find  your- 
selves. Save  the  church  from  the  shipwreck  that 
threatens  her,  by  seeking  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  alone 
the  rule  of  faith  which  we  must  believe  and  profess. 

I  have  spoken.     God  be  my  helper ! 


196  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


CHA  PTEB   IX. 

THE  ACTS  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

The  Council,  not  yet  formally  concluded,  but  to  all 
intents  and  purposes  defunct,  has  left  as  a  legacy  to 
the  Roman-catholic  church,  besides  a  history  of  scan- 
dals, and  the  hidden  seeds  of  discord  and  weakness, 
two  documents  under  the  title  of  "Dogmatic  Constitu- 
tions." 

The  first  of  these,  entitled  "  Dogmatic  Constitution 
on  the  Catholic  Faith,"  is  of  small  consequence  in 
ecclesiastical  history,  inasmuch  as  it  treats,  under  four 
heads,  of  matters  on  which  there  was  little  difference 
among  those  who  were  likely  to  be  affected  by  the 
authority  from  which  it  proceeded.  The  Roman-cath- 
olics did  not  need  it,  and  the  atheists,  pantheists,  and 
heretics  against  whom  it  was  levelled  were  sure  to  pay 
no  attention  to  it.  It  is  sufficient  to  the  purpose  of 
this  volume,  omitting  the  verbose  periods  of  the  "  con- 
stitution," to  give  the  four  chapters  of  Canons  in  which 
the  substance  of  the  constitution  is  briefly  summed  up 
negatively  in  the  form  of  curses  against  the  contrary 
errors. 

CANONS  ON  THE  CATHOLIC  FAITH. 

I.     OF   GOD  THE   CEEATOE  OF   ALL  THINGS. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  deny  one  true  God,  Creator  and 
Lord  of  things  visible  and  invisible  ;  let  him  be  anath- 
ema. 


THE  ACTS   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  197 

2.  If  any  one  shall  not  be  ashamed  to  amrni  that 
nothing  exists  except  matter  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  substance  and 
essence  of  God  and  of  all  things  is  one  and  the  same  ; 
let  him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  finite  beings,  both  cor- 
poreal and  spiritual,  or  at  least  spiritual,  have  emana- 
ted from  the  divine  substance ;  or  that  the  divine 
essence,  by  the  manifestation  and  evolution  of  itself, 
becomes  all  things ;  or  lastly,  that  God  is  universal  or 
indefinite  being,  which  by  determining  itself  constitutes 
the  universality  of  things,  distinct  according  to  genera, 
species,  and  individuals  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

5.  If  any  one  confess  not  that  the  world  and  all 
things  which  are  contained  in  it,  both  spiritual  and 
material,  have  been,  in  their  whole  substance,  pro- 
duced by  God  out  of  nothing  ;  or  shall  say  that  God 
created,  not  by  his  will,  free  from  all  necessity,  but  by 
a  necessity  equal  to  that  whereby  he  loves  himself ;  or 
shall  deny  that  the  world  was  made  for  the  glory  of 
God  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

I  II.     OF   REVELATION, 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  one  true  God,  our 
Creator  and  Lord,  cannot  be  certainly  known  by  the 
natural  light  of  human  reason  through  created  things  ; 
let  him  be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  it  is  impossible  or  in- 
expedient that  man  should  be  taught  by  divine  revolu- 
tion concerning  God  and  the  worship  to  be  paid  to 
him  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  man  cannot  be  raised 
by  divine  power  to  a  higher  than  natural  knowledge 
and  perfection,  but  can  and  ought,  by  a  continuous 


198  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

progress,  to  arrive  at  length,  of  himself,  to  the  pos- 
session of  all  that  is  true  and  good ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

4.  If  anyone  shall  not  receive  as  Bacred  and  canon- 
ical the  books  of  Holy  Scripture,  entire  with  all  their 
parts,  as  the  holy  Synod  of  Trent  has  enumerated  them,* 
or  shall  deny  that  they  have  been  divinely  inspired  ;  let 
him  be  anathema. 

III.     OF   FAITH. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  human  reason  is  so 
independent  that  faith  cannot  be  enjoined  niton  it  by 
God  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  divine  faith  is  not  dis- 
tinguished from  natural  knowledge  of  God  and  of  moral 
truths,  and  therefore  that  it  is  not  requisite  tor  divine 
faith  that  revealed  truth  be  believed  because  of  the 
authority  of  God  who  reveals  it ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  divine  revelation  can- 
not be  made  credible  by  outward  signs,  and  therefore 
that  men  ought  to  be  moved  to  faith  solely  by  the  inter- 
nal experience  of  each,  or  by  private  inspiration  ;  let 
him  be  anathema. 

4.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  miracles  are  impossible, 
and  therefore  that  all  the  accounts  regarding  them, 
even  those  contained  in  holy  Scripture,  are  to  be  dis- 
missed as  fabulous  or  mythical ;  or  that  miracles  can 
never  be  known  with  certainty,  and  that  the  divine  ori- 
gin of  Christianity  cannot  be  proved  by  them  ;  let  him 
be  anathema. 

5.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  assent  of  Christian 
faith  is  not  a  free  act,  but  is  inevitably  produced  by  the 
arguments  of  human  reason  ;  or  that  the  grace  of  God 

[*  This  enumeration  includes  the  Apocrypha.] 


THE    ACTS    OF   THE   COUNCIL.  199 

is  necessary  for  that  living  faith  only  which  worketh 
by  charity  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

6.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  the  condition  of  the 
faithful,  and  of  those  who  have  not  yet  attained  to  the 
only  true  faith,  is  on  a  par,  so  that  Catholics  may  have 
just  cause  for  doubting,  with  suspended  assent,  the 
faith  which  they  have  already  received  under  the  magis- 
terium  of  the  church,  until  they  shall  have  obtained  a 
scientific  demonstration  of  the  credibility  and  truth  of 
their  faith  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

IV.     OF   FAITH  AND   REASON. 

1.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  in  divine  revelation 
there  are  no  mysteries,  truly  and  properly  so  called, 
but  that  all  the  doctrines  of  faith  can  be  understood 
and  demonstrated  from  natural  principles,  by  properly 
cultivated  reason  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

2.  If  any  one  shall  say  that  human  sciences  are  to 
be  so  freely  treated  that  their  assertions,  although 
opposed  to  revealed  doctrine,  are  to  be  held  as  true, 
and  cannot  be  condemned  by  the  church ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

3.  If  any  one  shall  assert  it  to  be  possible  that 
sometimes,  according  to  the  progress  of  science,  a  sense 
is  to  be  given  to  doctrines  propounded  by  the  church 
other  than  what  it  has  understood  and  understands  ; 
let  him  be  anathema. 

Therefore  we,*  fulfilling  the  duty  of  our  supreme 
pastoral  office,  entreat  by  the  mercies  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  by  the  authority  of  the  same  our  God  and  Saviour 
we  command,  all  the  faithful  of  Christ,  and  especially 
those  who  are  set  over  others,  or  are  charged  with  the 
office  of  instruction,  that  they  earnestly  and  diligently 

*  That  is,  the  pope,  ' '  with  the  approval  of  the  holy  Council. " 


200  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

apply  themselves  to  ward  off  and  eliminate  these  errors 
from  the  church,  and  to  spread  the  light  of  pure  faith. 
And  since  it  is  not  sufficient  to  shun  heretical  prav- 
ity,  unless  those  errors  also  be  diligently  avoided  which 
more  or  less  nearly  approach  it,  we  admonish  all  men 
of  the  further  duty  of  observing  those  constitutions 
and  decrees  by  which  such  erroneous  opinions  as  are 
not  here  specifically  enumerated,  have  been  proscribed 
and  condemned  by  this  Holy  See.* 

The  other  constitution  adopted,  by  the  Council 
bears  the  title,  u Firti  Dogmatic  Constitution  on  the 
Church  <>/'  Christ." 

After  a  page  or  two  of  preamble,  begins  the  first 
chapter,   entitled,  "  Of  the.  Institution  <>/  the  Apostolic 

Primacy  in  Bl  r,"  which  "  teaches  and  declares 

that  according  to  the  testimony  of  the  gospel,  the  pri- 
macy of  jurisdiction  over  the  universal  church  of  God 
was  immediately  and  directly  promised  and  given  to 
blessed  Peter  the  apostle,  by  Christ  the  Lord."  The 
page  of  scriptural  argument  with  which  this  proposi- 
tion is  sustained  it  is  unimportant  to  produce,  inas- 
much as  the  Council  claims  infallibility  only  in  the  d<  >g- 
mas  it  enunciates,  and  not  at  all  in  the  reasons  it  gives 
for  them.  Confessedly,  the  arguments  by  which  it  sup- 
ports its  infallible  dogmas  may  be  every  one  of  them 
fallacious  ;f  and  inasmuch  as  in  the  present  case  they 
have  been  refuted  in  advance  in  the  speech  of  Arch- 
bishop Kenrick,J  it  would  be  idle  to  transcribe  them. 

[*  This  concluding  paragraph  is  the  one  insidiously  appended 
to  the  constitution  "just  to  round  it  off  handsomely,"  and  after- 
wards treacherously  claimed  as  a  concession  of  infallibility.  See 
above,  pp.  83,  163.] 

\  See  Archbishop  Kenrick,  above,  p.  135. 
%  See  pp.  105-120.      For  the  full  text  of  these  Constitutions, 


THE    ACTS   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  201 

For  the  same  reason,  Chapter  II.,  "On  the  Perpetuity  of 
the  Primacy  of  Blessed  Peter  in  the  Rowan  Pontiffs,"  may 
be  quoted  "by  its  title  only."  We  come  to  the  real 
work  of  the  Council  only  when  we  reach  the  last  two 
chapters,  which  are  as  follows  : 

CHAPTEE  III. 

ON  THE  POWER  AND  NATURE  OF  THE  PRIMACY  OF  THE 
ROMAN  PONTIFF. 

Wherefore,  resting  on  plain  testimonies  of  the 
sacred  Scriptures,  and  adhering  to  the  plain  and  ex- 
press decrees  both  of  our  predecessors,  the  Roman  pon- 
tiffs, and  of  the  General  Councils,  we  renew  the  defini- 
tion of  the  (Ecumenical  Council  of  Florence,  in  virtue 
of  which  all  the  faithful  of  Christ  must  believe  that  the 
holy  apostolical  see  and  the  Roman  pontiff  possesses 
the  primacy  over  the  whole  world,  and  that  the  Roman 
pontiff  is  the  successor  of  blessed  Peter,  prince  of  the 
apostles,  and  is  true  vicar  of  Christ,  and  head  of  the 
whole  church,  and  father  and  teacher  of  all  Christians  ; 
and  that  full  power  was  given  to  him  in  blessed  Peter 
to  rule,  feed,  and  govern  the  universal  church  by  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord  ;  as  is  also  contained  in  the  acts  of  the 
General  Council  and  in  the  sacred  Canons. 

Hence  we  teach  and  declare  that  by  the  appoint- 
ment of  our  Lord  the  Roman  church  possesses  a  supe- 
riority of  ordinary  power  over  all  other  churches,  and 
that  this  power  of  jurisdiction  of  the  Roman  pontiff, 
which  is  truly  episcopal,  is  immediate  ;  to  which  all,  of 
whatever  rite  and  dignity,  both  pastors  and  faithful, 
both  individually  and  collectively,  are  bound,  by  their 
duty  of  hierarchical  subordination  and  true  obedience, 

in  Latin  unci  English,  see  Abp.  Manning's  Petri  PrivUec/ium,  3. 
182-210. 

9* 


202  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

to  submit,  not  only  in  matters  which  belong  to  faith 
and  morals,  but  also  in  those  that  appertain  to  the 
discipline  and  government  of  the  church  throughout 
the  world,  so  that  the  church  of  Christ  may  be  one 
flock  under  one  supreme  pastor,  through  the  preserva- 
tion of  unity  both  of  communion  and  of  profession  of 
the  same  faith  with  the  Koman  pontiff.  This  is  the 
teaching  of  Catholic  truth,  from  which  no  one  can  de- 
viate without  loss  of  faith  and  of  salvation. 

But  so  far  is  this  power  of  the  supreme  pontiff  from 
being  any  prejudice  to  the  ordinary  and  immediate 
power  of  episcopal  jurisdiction,  by  which  bishops,  who 
have  been  set  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  succeed  and  hold 
the  place  of  the  apostles,  feed  and  govern  each  his  own 
flock,  as  true  pastors,  that  this  their  episcopal  author- 
ity is  really  asserted,  strengthened,  and  protected  by 
the  supreme  and  universal  pastor;  in  accordance  with 
the  words  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great  :  "My  honor  is 
the  honor  of  the  whole  church.  My  honor  is  the  firm 
strength  of  my  brethren.  I  am  truly  honored  when 
the  honor  due.to  each  and  all  is  not  withheld."*  * 

Further,  from  this  supreme  power  possessed  by  the 
Roman  pontiff  of  governing  the  universal  church,  it 
follows  that  he  has  t]^e  right  of  free  communication 

*  Letters  of  St  Gregory  the  Great,  book  8.  30,  vol.  2,  p.  919, 
Benedictine  edition,  Paris,  1705.  [The  disclaimer  in  this  para- 
graph was  plainly  intended  as  a  salve  for  the  soreness  of  those 
bishops  who  had  protested  against  this  statement  of  the  supreme 
and  immediate  jurisdiction  of  the  pope  in  all  dioceses,  as  being 
destructive  of  the  dignity  and  almost  of  the  function  of  the  bish- 
ops. It  was  much  to  concede  to  him  the  supreme  mediate  jurisdic- 
tion, reaching  the  priests  and  laity  through  the  medium  of  the 
bishop.  But  to  concede  to  him  the  right  of  governing  the  priests 
and  laity  directly,  over  the  head  of  the  bishop,  through  legates 
and  vicars  apostolic,  was  to  concede  everything  ;  and  well  deserved 
to  be  repaid,  at  least  with  a  few  such  civil  words.] 


THE    ACTS   OF    THE    COUNCIL.  203 

with  the  pastors  of  the  whole  church,  and  with  their 
flocks,  that  these  may  be  taught  and  ruled  by  him  in 
the  way  of  salvation.  "Wherefore  we  condemn  and 
reject  the  opinions  of  those  who  hold  that  the  commu- 
nication between  this  supreme  head  and  the  pastors 
and  their  flocks  may  lawfully  be  impeded ;  or  who 
make  this  communication  subject  to  the  secular  power, 
so  as  to  maintain  that  whatever  is  done  by  the  apos- 
tolic see  or  by  its  authority,  for  the  government  of  the 
church,  cannot  have  force  or  value  unless  it  be  con- 
firmed by  the  assent  of  the  secular  power.  And  since, 
by  the  divine  right  of  apostolic  primacy,  the  Roman 
pontiff  is  placed  over  the  universal  church,  we  further 
teach  and  declare  that  he  is  the  supreme  judge  of  the 
faithful,*  and  that  in  all  cases  the  decision  of  which 
belongs  to  the  church  recourse  may  be  had  to  this  tri- 
bunal, f  and  that  none  may  reopen  the  judgment  of 
the  apostolic  see,  than  whose  authority  there  is  no 
greater,  nor  can  any  lawfully  review  its  judgment.  J 
Wherefore  they  err  from  the  right  course  who  assert 
that  it  is  lawful  to  appeal*  from  the  judgments  of  the 
Roman  pontiffs  to  an  (Ecumenical  Council  as  to  an 
authority  higher  than  that  of  the  Roman  pontiff. 

*  Brief  of  Pius  VI.,  Super  soliditate,  of  November  28,  1786. 

f  Acts  of  the  Fourteenth  General  Council,  (Second  of  Lyons,) 
a.  d.  1274.  • 

X  Letter  VIII.  of  Pope  Nicholas  L,  a.  d.  858,  to  the  Emperor 
Michael.  [It  is  under  this  principle  that  the  Roman-catholic 
church,  which  now  ostentatiously  disclaims  the  right  which  it  for- 
merly as  distinctly  claimed,  of  attempting  the  overthrow  of  a  sec- 
ular government  by  releasing  its  subjects  from  their  oath  of  alle- 
giance, may,  when  the  occasion  arises,  reach  the  same  end  by  de- 
ciding that  the  oath  is  no  longer  binding  and  allegiance  no  longer 
due.  The  next  paragraph,  which  declares  the  pope's  sovereignty 
to  extend  not  only  to  faith,  but  to  morals,  does  (as  this  word  is 
constantly  used  by  Roman-catholic  writers)  expressly  assert  that 
the  decision  of  such  political  questions  belongs  to  the  pope.  ] 


204  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

If  then  any  shall  say  that  the  Roman  pontiff  has 
the  office  merely  of  inspection  or  direction,  and  not 
full  and  supreme  power  of  jurisdiction  over  the  univer- 
sal church,  not  only  in  things  which  belong  to  faith 
and  morals,  but  also  in  those  which  relate  to  the  disci- 
pline and  government  of  the  church  spread  throughout 
the  world  ;  or  assert  that  he  possesses  merely  the  prin- 
cipal part  and  not  all  the  fullness  of  this  supreme 
power ;  or  that  this  power  is  not  ordinary  and  imme- 
diate, both  over  each  and  all  the  churches,  and  over 
each  and  all  the  pastors  and  the  faithful  ;  let  him  be 
anathema. 

CHAPTEB  IV. 

CONCERNING  THi:  IMALl.ir.I.r.  TEACHING  OF  the 
ROMAN  PONTIFF. 

Moreover,  that  the  supreme  power  of  teaching  is 
also  included  in  the  apostolic  primacy  which  the  Roman 
pontiff,  as  the  successor  of  Peter,  prince  of  the  apos- 
tles, possesses  over  the  whole  church,  this  holy  see  has 
always  held,  the  perpetual  practice  of  the  church  con- 
firms, and  (Ecumenical  Councils  also  have  declared, 
especially  those  in  which  the  East  with  the  West  met 
in  the  union  of  faith  and  charity.  For  the  fathers  of 
the  Fourth  Council  of  Constantinople,  following  in  the 
footsteps  of  their  predecessors,  gave  forth  this  solemn 
profession  :  The  first  condition  of  salvation  is  to  keep 
the  rule  of  the  true  faith.*  And  because  the  sentence 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  cannot  be  passed  by,  who 
said,  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and  on  this  rock  I  will  build 

[*  This  passage  illustrates  how  closely  the  whole  fabric  of  the 
Romish  system  is  connected  with  that  primary  perversion  which 
Archbishop  Kenrick  so  well  exposes  in  his  Speech,  pp.  99-101  ; 
the  perversion  of  the  word  "faith"  from  its  evangelical  meaning 
of  trust,  to  signify  the  acceptance  .of  dogmas.] 


THE   ACTS   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  205 

my  church,"  Matt.  16  :  18,  these  things  which  have 
been  said  are  approved  by  events,  because  in  the  apos- 
tolic see  the  Catholic  religion  and  her  holy  and  well- 
known  doctrine  have  always  been  kept  undefiled.  De- 
siring, therefore,  not  to  be  in  the  least  degree  separated 
from  the  faith  and  doctrine  of  that  see,  we  hope  that 
we  may  deserve  to  be  in  the  one  communion  which  the 
apostolic  see  preaches,  in  which  is  the  entire  and  true 
solidity  of  the  Christian  religion.*  And,  with  the 
approval  of  the  Second  Council  of  Lyons,  the  Greeks 
professed  that  the  Holy  Roman  Church  enjoys  supreme 
and  full  primacy  and  preeminence  over  the  whole 
Catholic  church,  which  it  truly  and  humbly  acknowl- 
edges that  it  has  received  with  the  plenitude  of  power 
from  our  Lord  himself  in  the  person  of  blessed  Peter, 
prince  or  head  of  the  apostles,  whose  successor  the 
Roman  pontiff  is ;  and  as  the  a£>ostolic  see  is  bound 
before  all  others  to  defend  the  truth  of  faith,  so  also  if 
any  questions  regarding  faith  sjiall  arise  they  must  be 
denned  by  its  judgment.  Finally,  the  Council  of  Flor- 
ence defined  :  That  the  Roman  pontiff  is  the  true  vicar 
of  Christ,  and  the  head  of  the  whole  church  and  the 
father  and  teacher  of  all  Christians  ;  and  that  to  him 
in  blessed  Peter  was  delivered  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
the  full  power  of  feeding,  ruling,  and  governing  the 
whole  church. 

To  satisfy  this  pastoral  duty  our  predecessors  ever 
made  unwearied  efforts  that  the  salutary  doctrine  of 
Christ  might  be  propagated  among  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth,  and  with  equal  care  watched  that  it  might 
be  preserved  genuine  and  pure  where  it  had  been  re- 
ceived.     Therefore  the  bishops  of  the  whole  world, 

°  Formula  of  St.  Hormisdas,  subscribed  by  the  fathers  of  the 
Eighth  General  Council,  (Fourth  of  Constantinople,)  a.  d.  8G9. 


9M  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

now  singly,  now  assembled  in  synod,  following  the  long 
established  custom  of  churches  and  the  form  of  the 
ancient  rule,  sent  word  to  this  apostolic  see  of  those 
dangers  especially  which  sprang  up  in  matters  of  faith, 
that  there  the  losses  of  faith  might  be  most  effectually 
repaired  where  the  faith  cannot  fail.*  And  the  Roman 
pontiffs,  according  to  the  exigencies  of  times  and  cir- 
cumstances, sometinus  assembling  (Ecumenical  Coun- 
cils, or  asking  for  the  mind  of  the  church  scattered 
throughout  tin;  world,  sometimes  by  particular  synods, 
sometimes  using  other  helps  which  divine  Providence 
supplied,  denned  as  to  be  held  those  things  which  with 
the  help  of  God  they  had  recognized  as  conformable 
with  the  sacred  Scriptures  and  apostolic  traditions. 
For  the  Holy  Spirit  was  not  promised  to  the  successors 
of  Peter  thai  by  His  revelation  they  might  make  known 
new  doctrines,  but  that  by  his  ce  they  might 

inviolably  keep  and  faithfully  expound  the  revelation  or 
deposit  of  faith  delivered  through  the  apostles.  And 
indeed  all  the  venerable  fathers  have  embraced,  and 
the  holy  orthodox  doctors  have  venerated  and  followed 
their  apostolic  doctrine  ;  knowing  most  fully  that  this 
see  of  holy  Peter  remains  ever  free  from  all  blemish  of 
error  according  to  the  divine  promise  of  the  Lord  our 
Saviour  made  to  the  prince  of  his  disciples  :  "I  have 
prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not,  and,  when  thou 
art  converted,  confirm  thy  brethren." 

This  gift,  then,  of  truth  and  never-failing  faith  was 
conferred  by  heaven  upon  Peter  and  his  successors  in 
this  chair,  that  they  might  perform  their  high  office  for 
the  salvation  of  all ;  that  the  whole  flock  of  Christ, 
kept  away  by  them  from  the  poisonous  food  of  error, 
might  be  nourished  with  the  pasture  of  heavenly  doc- 
*  Letter  of  St.  Bernard  to  Pope  Innocent  II. 


THE   ACTS   OF    THE    COUNCIL.  207 

trine  ;  that  the  occasion  of  schism  being  removed,  the 
whole  church  might  be  kept  one,  and,  resting  on  its 
foundation,  might  stand  firm  against  the  gates  of 
heU. 

But  since  in  this  very  age,  in  which  the  salutary 
efficacy  of  the  apostolic  office  is  most  of  all  required, 
not  a  few  are  found  who  take  away  from  its  authority, 
we  judge  it  altogether  necessary  solemnly  to  assert  the 
prerogative  which  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God  vouch- 
safed to  join  with  the  supreme  pastoral  office. 

Therefore,  faithfully  adhering  to  the  tradition  re- 
ceived from  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  faith,  for 
the  glory  of  God  our  Saviour,  the  exaltation  of  the 
Catholic  religion,  and  the  salvation  of  Christian  peo- 
ple, the  sacred  Council  approving,  we  teach  and  define 
that  it  is  a  dogma  divinely  revealed  :  that  the  Roman 
pontiff,  when  he  speaks  ex  catkedrb,  that  is,  when  in 
discharge  of  the  office  of  pastor  and  teacher  of  all 
Christians,  by  virtue  of  his  supreme  apostolic  author- 
ity he  defines  a  doctrine  regarding  faith  or  morals  to 
be  held  by  the  universal  church,*  by  the  divine  assist- 
ance promised  to  him  in  blessed  Peter,  is  possessed  of 
that  infallibility  with  which  the  divine  Kedeemer  willed 
that  his  church  should  be  endowed  for  defining  doc- 
trine, faith,  or  morals ;  and  that  therefore  such  defini- 
tions of  the  Roman  pontiff  are  irreformable  of  them- 
selves, and  not  from  the  consent  of  the  church. 

[*  These  various  limitations  are  equivalent  (as  Bishop  Dupan- 
loup  has  suggested  in  his  Farewell  Letter — Appendix  to  Father 
Hyacinthe's  Discourses,  vol.  2)  to  a  definition  of  the  fallibility  of 
the  pope  on  all  other  occasions  than  those  of  ex  cathedra  utterance. 
For  instance,  while  the  decree  certifies  that  the  insolent  bull  Unam 
Sanctum,  which  claims  for  the  pope  secular  supremacy  over  all 
civil  governments,  (see  above,  p.  125,)  is  infallible  and  irreformable, 
i(  .virtually  warns  us  that  the  Allocution  addressed  to  certain  eccla- 


208  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

But  if  any  one — which  may  God  avert — presume  to 
contradict  this  our  definition  ;  let  him  be  anathema. 

The  work  of  examining  and  comparing  the  enor- 
mous series  of  papal  document  1  and  genuine, 
to  see  which  of  them  come  within  the  terms  of  infalli- 
bility, is  a  work  yet  to  be  executed  by  scholars,    3 

terms  have  been  fixed  with  caution,  in  order  to  exclude 
the  notoriously  heretical  teachings  of  certain  of  the  ear- 
lier popes,   as  Honorius  and  Libcrius.     According  to 

siastics  by  Pius  IX.  in  July  or  August,  1871,  in  whichhe  distinctly 
repudiate!  the  doctrine  of  U  poken  by  him  as 

a  mere  man,  and  is  not  in  the  least  to  In-  busted  Speaking  in  this 
Allocution  "as  a  private  doctor,"  and  then  for.'  I'alliUy,  ho  claims 
that  the  overthrow  of  governments  by  popes  was  never  atti 

under  the  pretence  of  a  divine  right,  hut  only  by  virtue  of  the  pub- 
tie  law  and  usage  of  li  and  that  the  contrary  statement 
is  an  Ugly  calumny,  designed  to  em1  relations  of  the 
Holy  See  with  civil  governments. 

The  claim  is  a  timid  tergiversation,  extorted  hy  the  threatening 
posture  of  events,  and  quite  unworthy  the  author  of  the  Syllabus. 
Another  private  doctor,  whose  authority  far  outweighs  that  of  Dr. 
Mastai-Ferretti,  to  wit,  Dr.  Orestes  A.  Brownson,  declares  that  "  the 
power  she  [the  church]  exercised  over  sovereigns  in  the  middle 
ages  was  not  a  usurpation,  was  not  derived  from  the  concessions 
of  princes  or  the  consent  of  the  people,  but  it  was  and  is  hers  by 
ight;  and  whoso  resists  it  rebels  against  the  King  of  kings." 
....  "All  history  fails  to  show  an  instance  in  which  the  pope,  in 
deposing  a  temporal  sovereign,  professes  to  do  it  by  the  authority 
vested  in  him  by  the  pious  belief  of  the  faithful,  generally-received 
maxims,  the  opinion  of  the  age,  the  concessions  of  sovereigns,  or 
the  civil  constitution  and  public  laws  of  Catholic  states.  On  the 
contrary,  he  always  claims  to  do  it  by  the  authority  committed  to 
him  as  the  successor  of  the  prince  of  the  apostles  ....  by  the 
authority  of  Almighty  God."  .  .  .  "Either  the  popes  usurped  the 
authority  they  exercised  over  sovereigns  in  the  middle  ages,  or 
they  possessed  it  by  virtue  of  their  title  as  vicars  of  Jesus  Christ 
on  earth."  Brownson's  Quarterly  Review,  April,  1854.  See  the 
quotation  more  in  full  at  p.  583  of  a  convenient  book  of  reference, 
"Romanism  as  it  Is,"  by  Rev.  S.  W.  Barnum,  Hartford,  1871.] 


THE    ACTS    OF   THE    COUNCIL.  209 

some  Catholic  scholars,  no  document  of  all  the  first 
twelve  centuries  of  church  history  bears  this  charac- 
ter.* But  according  to  others,  of  equal  authority, 
there  are  instances  of  ex  cathedra  teaching  as  far  back 
as  the  age  of  Cyprian  and  Pope  St.  Stephen,  f  The  best 
that  can  be  said  is  that  it  is  still  left  by  the  Council  a 
doubtful  question,  and  probably  one  that  can  never  be 
fully  settled  without  a  special  papal  revelation,  what 
documents  are  to  be  reckoned  as  belonging  to  the  new 
Bible  of  the  Roman-catholic  church. 

Four,  however,  of  those  which  are  most  distinctly 
certified  to  the  public,  under  the  terms  of  the  Vatican 
dogma,  as  infallible  and  "irreformable,"  demand  atten- 
tion. 

I.  The  first  is  the  bull  Unam  Sanctam  addressed  to 
the  whole  Christian  world  in  the  year  1302,  by  Boni- 
face VIII. ,  which  teaches  "that  there  are  in  the  church 
and  in  its  power  two  swords,  the  spiritual  and  the  tem- 
poral :  that  it  belongs  to  the  spiritual  power  to  estab- 
lish the  temporal  and  to  judge  it  when  it  is  in  the 
wrong  ;  so  that  if  the  secular  power  goes  astray  it  is 
to  be  judged  by  the  spiritual  power ;  if  the  inferior 
spiritual  power  errs,  it  is  to  be  judged  by  the  higher ; 
but  if  the  supreme  spiritual  power  errs,  it  can  be  judged 
by  God  only,  and  not  by  man ;  and  that  this  supreme 
authority,  not  human,  but  divine,  is  vested  in  Peter  and 

*  Quirinus,  p.  131. 

t  See  the  long  Latin  tractate  by  Bishop  Ketteler  of  Mayence, 
entitled  "  Quwstio"  in  Documenta  ad  lllustrandum  Concilium  Vati- 
canum.  Speaking  of  the  pope's  letter  to  Cyprian  on  the  rebaptism 
of  those  baptized  by  heretics,  the  bishop  (now  a  fierce  adherent  of 
infallibility)  remarks  :  "  If  .there  is  any  such  thing  as  a  definition 
ex  cathedrd,  this  was  one,"  and  then  proceeds  to  show  that  instead 
of  being  deferred  to  as  infallible  or  even  authoritative,  it  was  op- 
posed with  all  his  might  by  that  apostle  of  the  authority  of  the 
Roman  see,  St.  Cyprian  himself.     Pp.  39,  40. 


210  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

his  successors  ;  and  that  every  human  creature  is  sub- 
ject to  the  pope  by  reason  of  sin."* 

II.  Paul  IV.  issued  with  peculiar  solemnity,  and 
directly  ex  cathalra,  his  bull  Gum  ex  Apostclatus  officio.^ 
He  had  consulted  his  cardinals,  and  obtained  their 
signatures  to  it,  and  then  defined,  "out  of  the  pleni- 
tude of  his  apostolic  power,"  the  following  proposi- 
tions : 

(1.)  The  pope,  who  as  "Pontifex  Maximus"  is 
God's  representative  on  earth,  has  full  authority  and 
power  over  nations  and  kingdoms  ;  he  judges  all,  and 
can  in  this  world  be  judged  by  none. 

(2.)  All  princes  and  monarchs,  as  well  as  bishops, 
as  soon  as  they  fall  into  heresy  or  schism,  without  the 
need  of  any  legal  formality,  arc  irrevocably  deposed, 
deprived  for  ever  of  all  rights  of  government,  and  incur 
sentence  of  death. 

(3.)  None1  may  venture  to  give  any  aid  to  an  heret- 
ical or  sehismatical  prince,  not  even  the  mere  services 
of  common  humanity  ;  any  monarch  who  does  so  for- 
feits his  doroinions  and  property,  which  lapse  to  princes 
obedient  tojthe  pope,  on  their  gaining  possession  of 
them.  .  .  .  JV. 

Such  is  this  most  solemn  declaration,  issued  as  late 
as  1558,  subscribed  by  the  cardinals,  and  afterwards 
expressly  confirmed  and  renewed  by  Pius  V.,  that  the 
pope,  by  virtue  of  his  absolute  authority,  can  depose 
every  monarch,  hand  over  every  country  to  foreign 
invasion,  deprive  every  one  of  his  property,  and  that 
without  any  legal  formality,  and  not  only  on  account 

*  See  above,  in  Abp.  Kenrick's  Speech,  p.  125  ;  and  in  "Fou- 
voir  du  Pape  au  Moyen  Age,"  p.  571.     Paris,  1815. 

t  The  account  of  this  bull  is  abridged  from  Janus— Pope  and 
Council— pp.  311,  312,  Am.  ed. 


,  THE   ACTS    OF   THE    COUNOIL.  211 

of  dissent  from  the  doctrines  approved  at  Rome,  or  of 
separation  from  the  church,  but  for  merely  offering  an 
asylum  for  such  dissidents,  so  that  no  rights  of  dynasty 
or  nation  are  respected,  but  nations  are  to  be  given  up 
to  all  the  horrors  of  a  war  of  conquest. 

EEL  Far  graver  and  more  permanent  consequences 
resulted  from  the  other  document,*  the  bull  In  Ccena 
Domini,  which  the  popes  had  labored  at  for  centuries, 
and  which  was  finally  brought  out  in  the  pontificate  of 
Urban  VIIL,  in  1627.  It  had  appeared  first  in  its 
broader  outlines  under  Gregory  XL,  in  1372.  Gregory 
XII.,  in  1411,  renewed  it,  and  under  Pius  V.,  in  1568, 
it  preserved  its  substantial  identity,  with  certain  addi- 
tions. According  to  his  decision  it  was  to  remain  as 
an  eternal  law  in  Christendom,  and  above  all  to  be  im- 
posed on  bishops,  penitentiaries,  and  confessors,  as  a 
rule  they  were  to  impress  in  the  confessional  on  the 
consciences  of  the  faithful.  If  ever  any  document  bore 
the  stamp  of  an  ex  cathedrh  decision,  it  is  this,  which 
has  been  over  and  over  again  confirmed  by  so  many 
popes. 

This  bull  excommunicates  and  curses  .all  heretics 
and  schismatics,  as  well  as  all  who  favtftefcor  defend 
them — all  princes  and  magistrates,  therefore,  who  allow 
the  residence  of  heterodox  persaais  in  their  country.  It 
excommunicates  and  curses  all  who  keep  or  print  the 
books  of  heretics  without  papal  permission,  all — wheth- 
er private  individuals  or  universities,  or  other  corpora- 
tions— who  appeal  from  a  papal  decree  to  a  future  Gen- 
eral Council.  It  encroaches  on  the  independence  and 
sovereign  rights  of* states,  in  the  imposition  of  taxes, 
the  exercise  of  judicial  authority,  and  the  punishment 
of  the  crimes  of  clerics,  by  threatening  with  excommu- 
*  Seo  Janus,  Pope  and  Council,  313. 


212  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

nication  and  anathema  those  who  perform  such  acts 
without  special  papal  permission  ;  and  these  penalties 
fall  not  only  on  the  supreme  authorities  of  the  state, 
but  on  the  whole  body  of  civil  functionaries,  down  to 
scribes,  jailers,  and  executioners.  The  pope  alone  can 
absolve  from  these  censures,  except  in  artieiUo  mortis.  . .  . 
This  bull  was  annually  published  in  Rome  on  Maundy- 
Thursday  for  two  hundred   years and  if  it  has 

ceased  to  be  read  out  on  that  day,  as  before,  since 
Clement  XIV. 's  time,  still  it  is  always  treated,  as  Cre- 
tinean-Joly  states,  in  the  Roman  tribunals  and  congre- 
gations, as  having  legal  force.* 

TV.  A  fourth  document  on  which  authority  equal  to 
that  of  divine  inspiration  IS  now  declared  to  be  con- 
ferred is  the  notorious  encyclical  Quanta  Cura,  with  its 
appended  Syllabus,  This,  the  chief  of  the  recent  utter- 
ances of  the  chair  of  Peter,  has  already  been  transcribed 
in  full  upon  the  pages  of  this  volume. f  But  in  one, 
especially,  of  its  censures,  the  infallibihty  of  this  docu- 
ment is  pledged  to  the  vindication  of  all  the  monstrous 
and  hideous  usurpations  and  tyrannies  of  which  the 
popes  in  all  past  ages  have  been  guilty.     The  twenty- 

*  The  bull  In  i  'cunu  Domini  is  quoted  by  Archbishop  Manning 
as  being  in  full  force  at  this  day,  in  /  .  3.  19,  note. 

But  as  if  to  repudiate  in  the  most  unmistakable  terms  the  excuses 
otfered  by  those  Roman-catholic  apologists  in  free  countries,  who 
pretend  that  this  "  irreformable  "  and  infallible  bull  has  become 
obsolete,  and  that  the  Romish  church  has  ceased  to  be  a  tyranni- 
cal and  persecuting  institution,  one  of  the  first  acts  of  the  reigning 
pope  after  the  assembling  of  the  Council  was  to  fulminate  a  new 
bull,  Apostolicce  Skdis,  '-virtually  intended  as  a  renewal  or  confir- 
mation of  the  bull  In  Coenu  Domini."  "Certain  excommunications 
nobody  paid  any  attention  to  are  dropped  out,  as,  for  instance,  of 
sovereigns  and  governments  who  levy  taxes  without  permission  of 
the  pope.  But  new  censures  of  wider  application  have  come  into 
their  place."     Quirinus,  100,  105. 

f  See  above,  pp.  22-48. 


THE    ACTS   OF    THE    COUNCIL.  213 

third  article  of  the  Syllabus  stigmatizes  as  one  of  "the 
principal  errors  of  our  time"  the  statement  that  "the 
Roman  pontiffs  have  exceeded  the  limits  of  their  power 
or  usurped  the  rights  of  princes."*  'What  atrocities 
against  the  rights  of  man  and  the  liberty  of  nations 
are  hereby  justified  and  claimed  as  within  the  just 
power  of  the  popes  for  all  future  time,  all  history  de- 
clares. 

According  to  the  new  dogma,  the  pope  may  by 
divine  right  give  whole  nations  into  slavery  on  account 
of  some  measure  of  their  sovereign. 

He  has  the  right  to  make  slaves  of  a  foreign  nation 
merely  because  they  are  not  Catholics. 

He  has  the  right  to  rob  innocent  populations,  cities, 
regions,  or  countries  en  masse,  with  the  sole  exception 
of  infants  and  the  dying,  of  all  those  services  which  he 
declares  essential  to  salvation,  merely  because  the  sov- 
ereign or  government  has  violated  a  papal  command 
or  some  right  of  the  "church. f 

He  has  the  right  to  make  a  present  of  whole  coun- 
tries inhabited  by  non- Christian  peoples,  and  hand  over 

*  See  above,  p.  39.  In  the  Letter  Apostolic  Multiplices  inter, 
here  referred  to  in  the  Syllabus,  this  statement  is  cited  as  the  very- 
climax  of  the  horrors  contained  in  the  book  under  censure.  "  Fi- 
nally, not  to  speak  of  a  multitude  of  other  errors,  to  such  a  pitch 
of  audacity  and  impiety  does  he  proceed,  as  to  pretend,  with  nefa- 
rious insolence,  that  popes  of  Rome  and  (Ecumenical  Councils 
have  exceeded  the  limits  of  their  power,  and  usurped  the  rights  of 
princes,  and  also  erred  in  definitions  of  faith  and  morals."  fie- 
cueil  des  Allocutions  consistoriales,  Encycliques,  etc.,  cities  dans  VEn- 
cyclique  ct  le  Syllabus  du  8  Dicembre,  1864.  Paris,  1865.  In  this 
edition,  published  by  the  "printers  to  the  pope,"  the  French 
translation  is  untrustworthy,  two  significant  clauses  being  sup- 
pressed from  the  single  sentence  above  quoted. 

f  Pope  Clement  IV.,  in  1265,  "did  not  exceed  his  powers" 
when  he  applied  this  process  to  Charles  of  Anjou,  sheerly  to  en- 
force the  prompt  collection  of  a  debt.     Janus,  12. 


214  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

all  rights  of  sovereignty  and  property  in  them  to  any 
Christian  prince  he  may  pin 

He  has  the  right  to  incite  princes,  by  promises  of 
forgiveness  of  sins  and  heaven,  to  make  war  on  the 
enemies  of  his  secular  authority. 

He  lias  the  right  to  provide  for  the  Inquisition  by 
direct  and  personal  legislation  of  his  own,  depriving 
those  accused  before  the  holy  office  of  any  advocate  to 
defend  them,  authorizing  the  application  of  the  tor- 
ture, obliging  the  magistrate  to  carry  out  the  capital 
sentences  of  the  Inquisition,  prohibiting  them  to 
spare  the  life  of  any  lapsed  heretic,  even  on  his  con- 
version. 

He  "does  not  exceed  his  powers"  in  forcibly  de- 
priving heretics  of  their  children  in  order  that  they 
may  be  brought  up  Catholics. 

He  "does  not  exceed  his  powers"  in  releashi 
his  pleasure  from  oaths  of  allegiance  taken  by  a  people 
to  their  government. 

He  "does  not  exceed  his  powers"  in  absolving  a 
sovereign  from  the  treaties  he  has  sworn  to  observe,  or 
from  his  oath  to  the  constitution  of  his  country,  or  in 
giving  full  power  to  his  confessor  to  absolve  him  from 
any  oath  he  finds  it  inconvenient  to  keep. 

He  "  does  not  exceed  his  powers  "  when  he  assumes 
to  dissolve  the  bond  of  marriage  by  declaring  one  of  the 
parties  to  be  excommunicated. 

The  act  of  Pope  Adrian  IV.,  in  delivering  Ireland 
over  to  that  subjection  to  the  English  crown  from 
which  it  has  never  escaped,  was  within  the  power  of 
the  pope. 

And  the  act  of  St.  Pius  V.,  and  of  his  successor 
Sextus  V.,  which  excommunicated  Queen  Elizabeth  of 
England  and  invited  her  assassination,  is  justified  by 


THE    ACTS   OF    THE    COUNCIL.  215 

the  Council  as  an  act  which  it  would  be  right  to  do 
again,  under  like  circumstances.* 

*  See  Quirinus,  pp.  634-653.  Janus,  p.  12.  Bishop  Dupan- 
loup,  Appendix  to  Hyacinthe,  vol.  2  ;  with  the  references  cited  by 
each.  All  these,  at  the  time  of  writing,  were  acknowledged  Cath- 
olic writers. 


216  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 


CHAPTEB  X. 

THE  SEQUEL  OF  THE  COUNCIL. 

The  outburst  of  war  which  followed  immediately 
upon  the  promulgation  of  the  new  dogma,  and  drove 
the  terrified  pope  and  court  of  Rome  to  an  immediate 
prorogation  of  the  Council,  was  not  altogether  an  un- 
toward c\cnt  to  the  Romish  church.  It  swept  away 
indeed,  williin  nin<  the  temporal  sovereignty  of 

the  pope,  which  might  otherwise  have  lasted  a  few 
months  or  years  Longer.  But  it  served  to  distract  the 
minds  of  men  from  reflecting  upon  the  monstrous  act 
that  had  just  been  performed,  and  so  to  delay  a  little, 
and  perhaps  to  mitigate,  the  inevitable  revulsion  of 
thoughtful  minds  in  the  Roman-catholic  church  from 
the  "  sacrifice  of  the  intellect  "  which  was  now  demand- 
ed of  them  ;n  the  much-abused  name  of  Christian  faith. 
Weeks  and  months  passed  by,  and  the  agitations  of  an 
unprecedented  political  crisis,  continued  to  absorb  the 
intellectual  activity  of  the  world.  No  very  alarming 
sounds  of  protest  seemed  to  be  heard  from  any  quar- 
ter, and  the  abettors  of  the  plan  for  the  definition  of 
infallibility,  if  perchance  they  had  had  at  first  some 
misgivings  at  the  results  of  the  work  of  their  own 
hands,  plucked  up  courage  again,  and  made  themselves 
merry  over  the  forebodings  of  those  who  had  prophe- 
sied damage  and  loss  to  the  church  in  consequence  of 
the  definition. 

All  this  time,  however,  the  court  of  Rome  was  not 
idle. 


THE  SEQUEL  OF  THE  COUNCIL.     217 

When,  in  a  political  nominating  convention,  the 
more  numerous  of  two  factions  has  carried  its  point 
against  the  other  by  the  use  of  expedients  appropriate 
to  that  arena — the  "previous  question,"  the  "suspen- 
sion of  the  two-thirds  rule,"  etc. — and  so  has  accom- 
plished by  mere  majority  what,  after  all,  it  needs  the 
"moral  unanimity  "  of  the  party  to  make  of  any  avail ; 
it  becomes  necessary,  after  the  adjournment,  to  insti- 
tute measures  for  conciliating  or  whipping  in  the  dis- 
affected. 

The  situation  of  the  successful  party  in  the  Coun- 
cil wras  very  like  this.  If  the  threats  made  in  the 
speeches  and  protests  of  the  minority,  and  still  more 
vehemently  in  their  private  conversation,*  to  denounce 
the  Council  as  "void  of  truth  and  liberty,"  and  to 
refuse  assent  to  its  decrees  on  tins  ground,  f  and  on  the 
ground  that  no  conciliar  definition  could  make  that  to 
be  true  which  is  not  true  J — should  be  carried  out  by 
any  considerable  number,  all  the  cost  and  pains  that 
had  been  spent  in  assembling  the  Council  and  in  for- 
cing through  it  the  great  schema,  would  prove  to  have 
been  worse  than  in  vain. 

The  appliances  at  hand  for  bringing  refractory  ec- 

*  Iu  pursuance  of  the  plan  of  this  book,  to  make  no  statement 
except  on  the  authority  of  credible  documents,  we  have  refrained 
from  the  allegation  of  many  facts  which  tend  to  discredit,  even  to 
a  Eoman-catholic  mind,  the  authority  of  the  Council,  but  which 
are  demonstrated  only  by  private  testimony.  It  is  notorious,  and 
the  fact  is  proved  by  the  concurrent  testimony  of  many  inde- 
pendent witnesses,  that  the  bishops  of  the  minoritj7  were  profuse 
iu  denunciation  of  moral  and  physical  constraint,  intimidation, 
bribery,  and  corruption,  which  they  declared  to  have  been  prac- 
tised or  attempted  by  the  court  of  liome  in  carrying  through  of  its 
scheme.  The  statement  in  the  text  is  justified  by  reference  to 
Quirinus,  and  Ce  qui  se  passe  au  Concile,  passim. 

f  See  above,  pp.  70,  81,  82.  %  See  above,  pp.  85,  138. 

Vi.tioan  Council.  10 


218  THE   VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

clesiastics  to  terms  of  submission  were  not  few.  Some- 
times they  were  to  be  directly  summoned  to  surren- 
der, under  threat  of  deposition  and  excommunication. 
Sometimes  the  religious  awe  with  which  the  authority 
of  pope  and  council  is  regarded  by  sincere  Roman- 
catholics  might  be  trusted  to  work  against  t! 

oppression    and    outrage    with    which   the    dissentients 

had  taken  their  leave*  of  Rome  before  the  Council 
closed.  Sometimes,  doubtless,  the  consciousness  that 
all  hope  of  professional  promotion  was  dependent  on 
the  good-will  of  that  court  of  Rome  which  now  de- 
manded the  great  act  of  submission  mighl  be  counted 
on  to  torn  the  balance  of  some  hesitating  mind.  But 
another  process  for  enforcing  absolute  subservience  to 
the  central  will  had  Long  ago  been  prepared  against 
just  such  emergencies,  by  which  the  court,  without 
seeming  to  do  anything  at  all,  might  in  fact  do  i 
thing  short  of  actual  bodily  compulsion. 

Among  the  enormous  encroachments  of  the  Roman 
see  which  in  latter  ages  have  swallowed  up  the  last 
vestiges  of  the  freedom  of  the  bishops  is  that  which  is 
suggested  by  the  phrase  "  quinquennial  faculties."  At 
the  accession  of  each  bishop  to  his  office,  papers  are 
issued  to  him  licensing  him  for  five  years  from  that 
date,  and  no  longer,  (unless  the  license  be  renewed  for 
a  like  period,)  to  perform  certain  acts,  without  which  it 
would  be,  in  effect,  impossible  for  him  to  continue  the 
administration  of  his  diocese.  It  is  publicly  and  re- 
sponsibly charged,  in  Rome  itself,  before  the  very  face 
of  the  pope's  court,  that  the  adhesion  of  the  bishops  of 
the  minority  was  extorted  from  them  under  the  pressure 
of  the  refusal  otherwise  to  renew  their  "faculties."* 

*  Letter  to  Mgr.  Nardi,  published  in  La  Libertd,  Rome,  April 
14,  1871.      "You  think  that  the  question  of  infallibility  is  closed 


THE   SEQUEL   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  219 

By  one  influence  or  another  it  was  brought  about 
that  many,  in  fact,  nearly  all,  of  the  bishops  who  had 
protested  most  stoutly  against  the  dogma  as  incredible 

by  the  adhesion  of  many  of  the  opposition  bishops.  You  are  mis- 
taken. The  Council  not  having  been  concluded  with  the  definiens 
subscripsi  of  all  the  bishops,  the  opposition  may  at  any  time  be 
renewed.  And  well  it  may  be,  considering  that  the  adhesions  have 
been  obtained  in  a  manner  of  which  you  are  not  ignorant,  that  is, 
by  means  of  moral  violence.  I  will  mention  one  case,  by  way  of 
example.  As  the  last  Lent  approached,  the  opposition  bishops 
applied,  like  the  others,  for  the  renewal  of  their  'faculties' — for 
the  popes  now  hold  all  episcopal  powers  concentred  in  their  own 
hands.  Well,  what  was  the  answer?  That  if  they  wished  the 
faculties,  they  should  humble  themselves  at  the  feet  of  the  holy 
father,  that  is,  give  in  their  adhesion  to  his  infallibility  and  exclu- 
sive jurisdiction.  Thus  many  adhered,  in  order  to  escape  the 
vexation  of  the  Curia,  and  to  make  it  possible  to  carry  on  the 
spiritual  government  of  their  dioceses."  The  letter,  though  anony- 
mous, is  known  to  have  been  written  by  an  eminent  priest  of  one 
of  the  religious  orders  in  Rome.  In  his  speech  before  the  Old 
Catholic  Congress  at  Munich,  September,  1871,  Father  Hyacinthe 
describes  with  great  power  and  pathos  the  various  forms  of  "mor- 
al violence  "  brought  to  bear  on  the  will  and  even  on  the  conscience, 
of  those  who  in  their  hearts  disbelieved  the  infallibility^  dogma,  to 
induce  an  outward  act  of  submission. 

Among  the  "faculties"  or  licenses  issued  regularly  by  the 
pope  to  bishops,  on  their  application,  empowering  them  to  exer- 
cise functions  pertaining  to  their  office,  the  most  important  are 
those  which  are  always  conferred  for  the  term  of  five  years,  and  are 
therefore  called  "the  quinquennial  faculties."  When  the  person 
intrusted  with  them  dies  or  is  promoted  during  the  term,  the  fac- 
ulties do  not  descend  to  his  successor,  but  must  be  applied  for 
anew.  They  are  enumerated  in  twenty  particulars  ;  but  the  most 
important  may  be  summed  up  under  these  six  heads  : 

(1.)  The  power  of  absolving  in  cases  usually  reserved  to  the 
pope  ;  also  from  heresy,  apostasy,  schism,  and  even  (in  Protestant 
countries)  from  relapse. 

(2.)  Permission  to  have  and  read  (in  order  to  confute  them) 
heretical  and  other  writings  designated  in  the  Index  of  Prohibited 
Books  ;  and  to  allow  the  reading  of  them,  with  the  same  purpose, 
(under  a  prohibition  to  circulate  them,)  to  other  learned  and  dis- 
creet men. 


220  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

and  against  the  Council  as  being  without  liberty  and 
therefore  without  authority,  were  induced,  like  the 
archbishop  of  St.  Louis,  to  retract  their  words ;  or 
else,  like  the  bishop  of  Cleveland,  quietly  to  retire  from 
the  administration  of  their  dioceses.  The  first  voice 
to  break  the  silence  was  the  same  v  >f  one  cry- 

ing in  the  wilderness,  which  had  wakened  the  atten- 
tion of  the  whole  world  by  a  Protesi  uttered  from  the 
silence  of  his  Carmelite  cell,  one  short  year  before. 
The  following  is 

FATHER  HYACINTHE'S  APPEAL  TO  THE 
CATHOLIC  BISHOPS. 

Bona,  absent  in  body,  present  in  spirit) 
ristmaa,  U 

WheH  war  broke  out,  like  that  thunderbolt  which 
burst  over  the  Vatican  at  the  promulgation  of  the  im- 
pious dogma,  I  hastened  to  write  a  brief  protest.  This 
duty  fulfilled,  I  kept  silence.  I  watched  the  sweeping 
off,  as  of  the  chaff  which  the  wind  driveth  away,  of 
those    two   absolutisms  which,   sometimes   in   mutual 

(3.)  Permission  to  grant  dispensations  in  case  of  certain  im- 
pediments to  marriage. 

(4.)  Power' to  absolve  in  case  of  secret  crime,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  murder  ;  and  to  commute,  or  release  from  vows,  duties  of 
fasting,  etc. 

(5.)  Release  from  the  obligation  of  certain  of  the  more  cum- 
brous formalities  in  conducting  divine  sen  ice. 

(6.)  The  power  of  transferring  these  faculties  to  priests  within 
the  diocese. 

It  is  obvious  that  even  those  bishops  who  are  not  "remova- 
ble at  the  nod  "  of  the  pope,  must  nevertheless  become  quite  help- 
less in  their  subserviency  to  him,  as  soon  as  their  ' '  five-years'  fac- 
ulties "  expire. 

For  a  fuller  account  of  the  matter,  see  that  standard  Roman- 
catholic  work,  Wetzer  und  Welte's  Kirchen-Lexikon,  s.  v.  Fucul- 
men. 


THE  SEQUEL  OF  THE  COUNCIL.     221 

league,  sometimes  in  hostility,  had  so  grievously  op- 
pressed both  the  church  and  the  world — the  empire  of 
the  Napoleons  and  the  temporal  power  of  the  popes. 
The  abettors  of  the  infallibility  movement  have  not 
understood  this  religious  silence  to .  which  so  many 
souls  have  restrained  themselves,  and  which  they  above 
all  others  ought  to  have  maintained  ;  pursuing  that 
audacious  policy  which  with  one  stroke  has  accom- 
plished both  their  triumph  and  their  ruin,  they  busy 
themselves  with  noisy  calculations  upon  the  more  or 
less  prudent  reserve  of  some,  the  more  or  less  con- 
strained adherence  of  others.  Such  a  misunderstand- 
ing cannot  longer  be  kept  up  ;  it  would  be  wrong  not 
to  oppose  what  would  otherwise  result  in  establishing 
falsehood  by  prescriptive  right. 

The  political  catastrophe  which,  especially  for 
Frenchmen,  might  seem  at  first  a  reason  for  silence, 
becomes,  if  truly  apprehended,  an  urgent  motive  for 
speaking  and  acting.  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  it,  the 
question  which  at  this  very  moment  takes  precedence 
of  all  others  in  France  is  the  religious  question.  France 
cannot  do  without  Christianity  ;  and  yet  she  cannot 
accept  Christianity  under  the  forms  of  oppression  and 
corruption  with  which  it  has  been  disguised.  There- 
fore it  is  that  she,  even  more  than  the  Latin  races  in 
general,  has  been  forced  to  live  without  religion,  and 
consequently  without  moral  power,  between  ultramon- 
tanism  and  infidelity,  two  foes  of  which  she  has  taken 
but  too  slight  account,  and  against  whom  she  had  need 
to  fight  not  less,  certainly,  than  against  those  who  have 
invaded  nothing  but  her  soil. 

Suffer  me,  then,  in  the  presence  of  the  woes  of  my 
country  and  the  woes  of  the  church,  to  address  the 
Catholic  bishops  of  the  whole  world,  and  especially 


222  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

those  of  them  who  look  ujjon  the  situation  as  I  do 
myself,  and  who,  to  my  own  knowledge,  arc  not  few. 
Who  am  I  that  I  should  speak  to  them  so  boldly? 
But  the  illustrious  Gersoii  lias  not  hesitated  to  declare 
that  in  times  of  crisis  the  humblest  woman  has  the 
right  to  convoke  the  (Ecumenical  Council  and  save  the 
church  universal.  1  assume  this  right  ;  I  perform  this 
duty  ;  I  conjure  the  bishops  to  put  an  end  to  that  la- 
tent schism  which  is  separating  as  by  chasms,  the  depth 
of  which  is  the  more  fearful  as  it  is  more  unperceived. 
Above  all,  we  need  to  be  told  by  them  whether  the 
decrees  of  the  late  Council  are  binding  on  our  faith  or 
no.     In  an  assembly  the  primary  conditions  of  which 

are  absolute  liberty  of  discussion  and  moral  unanimity 

of  suffrage,  bishops,  respectable  by  reason  of  their 
number  ami  by  their  eminence  in  learning  and  in 
character,  openly  and  repeatedly  complained  of  ;tll 
manner  of  restrictions  put  upon  their  liberty,  and 
finally  refused  to  take  part  in  the  vote.  Is  it  possible 
that,  returning  to  their  dioceses,  and  waking  as  it  were 
from  a  long  dream,  they  have  acquired  the  retrospec- 
tive certainty  of  having  really  enjoyed,  while  at  Rome, 
that  moral  independence  of  which  they  were  not  con- 
scious at  the  time?  The  supposition  is  an  insult.  We 
are  not  dealing  here  with  one  of  those  mysteries  that 
are  above  man's  reason,  but  simply  with  a  fact  of  con- 
sciousness. To  change  one's  mind  in  a  matter  of  this 
sort  would  not  be  to  submit  one's  reason  to  authority ; 
it  would  be  to  sacrifice  one's  conscience. 

Now,  if  this  be  so,  we  are  still  tree,  after,  as  before 
the  Council,  to  reject  the  infalhbility  of  the  pope,  as  a 
doctrine  unknown  to  ecclesiastical  antiquity  and  hav- 
ing its  foundations  only  in  apocryphal  documents  upon 
which  criticism  has  pronounced  beyond  all  appeal. 


THE    SEQUEL   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  223 

We  are^till  free  to  say,  openly,  loyally,  that  we  do 
not  accept  the  late  Encyclicals  and  the  Syllabus,  which 
their  most  intelligent  defenders  are  constrained  to  in- 
terpret in  opposition  to  their  natural  meaning,  and  to 
the  known  intent  of  their  author,  and  the  result  of 
which,  if  they  were  to  be  taken  in  earnest,  would  be  to 
establish  a  radical  incompatibility  between  the  duties 
of  a  faithful  Catholic  and  those  of  an  impartial  scholar 
and  a  free  citizen. 

Such  are  the  most  salient  points  at  which  the  schism 
has  been  effected.  It  is  the  right  of  every  Catholic 
who  cares  for  the  integrity  and  the  dignity  of  his  faith, 
of  every  priest  who  has  at  heart  the  loyalty  of  his  min- 
istry, to  interrogate  the  bishops  on  these  points ;  and 
it  is  their  duty  to  answer  without  reservation  and  with- 
out subterfuge.  Reservation  and  subterfuge — these 
have  been  our  ruin.  *It  is  high  time  to  restore  in  our 
church  the  ancient  sincerity  in  religion  which  has  so 
decayed  among  us. 

But,  mark  it  well,  the  facts  and  doctrines  which  I 
have  pointed  out  are  connected  with  a  great  system, 
and,  to  reach  the  details,  the  remedy  must  penetrate 
the  whole.  The  question  is  aggravated  by  the  very 
excesses  of  the  ultramontanes,  and  from  this  time  forth 
the  issue  is  to  be  this  :  whether  or  not  the  nineteenth 
century  is  to  have  its  Catholic  Reformation,  as  the  six- 
teenth had  its  Protestant  Reformation. 

Look,  O  bishops',  upon  the  bride  of  Jesus  Christ, 
whom  you  also  have  espoused,  the  holy  Church,  pierced, 
like  Him,  with  five  wounds ! 

The  first,  the  wound  in  the  right  hand — the  hand 
which  holds  the  light,  is  the  hiding  of  the  word  of  God. 
That  sacred  volume,  opened  over  the  world  to  enlight- 
en and  to  fructify,  why  has  it  been  shut  up  again  in  the 


224  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

darkness  of  dead  languages,  and  under  then*  ;il  of  the 
severest  prohibitions?  The  bread  of  instruction  and 
life  which  God  had  prepared  as  well  for  the  poor  as  for 
the  wise  and  learned,  how  has  it  been  taken  from  them? 
It  is  vain  to  allege,  l'<»r  a  pretext,  the  abuses  of  1 
and  unbelief.  Put  the  Bible  in  its  true  relation  with 
science,  by  an  intelligent  exegesis,  and  they  will  have 
nothing  to  fear  from  each  other.  Put  it  in  its  true  re- 
lation with  the  people,  by  a  religions  education  worthy 
of  itself  and  of  them,  and  the  Bible  will  become  the 
safest  guide  of  the  people's  life — the  healthiest  inspi- 
ration of  their  worship. 

The  wound  in  the  other  hand  is  the  oppression  of 
intellect  and  conscience  by  the  abuse  of  hierarchical 
power.  Of  a  truth,  Jesus  Christ  said  to  his  apostles  : 
"Go,  teach  all  nations;"  but  he  said  also  to  them  : 
"The  princes  of  the  nations  exercise  dominion  over 
them,  but  it  shall  not  be  so  among  you  !"  Successors 
of  the  apostles,  make  haste  to  unbind  from  our  shoul- 
ders that  burden  which  neither  we  nor  our  fathers  liave 
been  able  to  bear,  and  restore  that  light  and  easy  yoke 
to  which  we  are  invited  by  the  love  of  the  Redeemer  ! 

And  what  shall  I  say  of  the  spear-wound  in  the 
heart  P  I  must  call  it  by  its  name,  for  they  who  most 
suffer  from  it  are  those  who  most  shrink  from  speaking 
of  it — it  is  the  celibacy  of  the  priests.  I  speak  not  of 
voluntary  celibacy,  the  more  pleasing  to  God  as  it  is 
free  and  joyous,  like  the  love  that  inspires  it — the  por- 
tion of  a  few  souls,  called  to  it  and  sustained  in  it  by 
an  exceptional  grace.  But  when  it  is  extended  indis- 
criminately over  natures  the  most  unlike  and  the  most 
unfit — when  it  is  imposed  as  an  irrevocable  oath  upon 
their  inexperience  and  enthusiasm,  celibacy  becomes  an 
institution  without  mercy,  and  too  often  without  mo- 


THE    SEQUEL   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  225 

rality.  The  nations  who  look  upon  it  as  the  exclusive 
ideal  of  perfection,  throw  contempt  on  the  sanctity  of 
wedded  life  ;  and,  debasing  the  family  in  comparison 
with  the  cloister,  they  reduce  the  family  to  a  mere  ref- 
uge for  vulgar,  or,  at  best,  for  earthly  souls.  The  do- 
mestic hearth  ceases  to  be  an  altar ! 

But  the  last  wounds  of  the  church,  that  cripple 
her  feet  when  she  would  rest  upon  the  earth,  are  these: 
worldly  policy  and  superstitious  piety.  A  policy  the 
church  must  have,  for  she  stands  in  necessary  relations 
with  the  powers  of  this  world  ;  but  that  policy  is  most 
completely  expressed  in  the  words  of  the  Master  :  "I, 
if  I  be  lifted  up  above  the  earth,  will  draw  all  men 
unto  me."  Is  this  that  policy  of  the  temporal  power 
and  the  secular  arm  which  makes  the  possession  of  cer- 
tain provinces  in  Italy  and  certain  privileges  in  Europe 
the  essential  condition  o£  the  empire  of  souls,  the  pivot 
of  the  whole  spiritual  structure  ?  A  policy  as  fatal  to 
the  church  and  the  world  as  that  Revolution  which  it 
subserves  even  while  it  is  contesting  it !  A  policy  the 
impotent,  blind  persistency  in  which  it  is  now  desired 
to  exalt  to  the  dignity  of  a  dogma !  And  yet  there  is 
no  lack  of  spiritual  force  in  modern  Catholicism.  It 
counts  its  devout  souls  by  thousands  ;  it  sees  the  no- 
blest works  and  virtues  nourishing  within  its  pale.  Why 
is  this  piety,  so  touching  and  so  genuine,  too  often 
handed  over  to  the  seductions  of  a  mysticism  without 
depth,  and  an  asceticism  without  austerity- — so  differ- 
ent from  those  that  shed  grandeur  on  the  early  Chris- 
tian centuries  ?  External  practices  of  devotion — mate- 
rial practices,  I  had  almost  said — are  multiplied  with- 
out limit ;  the  adoration  of  the  saints,  especially  of  the 
holy  Virgin,  are  developed  in  proportions  and  under  a 
character  which  are  alien  to  genuine  Catholic  feeling  ; 
10* 


220  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

mid  that  worship  of  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth, 
which  Jesus  made  the  soul  of  his  religion,  is  sensibly 
diminishing  among  us. 

Such  is  the  body  of  Christ,  in  the  state  bo  which 
our  sins  have  brought  it  on  the  earth — sins  of  the 
priests,  as  much  and  more  than  those  of  the  people. 
O  bishops,  will  you  have  no  pity  on  us  V  Will  you  not 
apply  some  efficacious  remedy?  "  Is  there  no  balm  in 
( lilcad  ?     Is  there  no  physician  there  ?" 

I  pause.  My  heart  is  so  burdened  that  I  cannot  go 
on.  I  know  not  what  shall  become  of  my  poor  word 
amid  the  shock  of  empires  and  the  voice  of  blood  going 
up  from  the  field  of  carnage.  But  I  know  this  :  that, 
if  it  be  not  strong  enough  to  speed  the  accomplish- 
ment of  God's  designs,  it  is  faithful  to  declare  them. 

And  this,  too,  I  know  :  that  I  do  not  separate  my- 
self from  the  holy  Catholic  faith,  nor  from  the  church 
of  my  baptism  and  priesthood  If  her  venerated  chiefs 
shall  heed  my  humble  appeal,  I  shall  resume  at  once, 
in  obedience  and  in  honor  and  loyalty,  a  ministry  which 
has  been  the  one  passion  of  my  youth,  the  one  ambi- 
tion of  my  life,  and  which  nothing  but  my  conscience 
could  haae  forced  me  painfully  to  relinquish.  If,  on 
the  contrary,  they  answer  me  only  by  their  reprobation 
or  their  silence,  I  shall  not  suffer  this  to  disturb  me  in 
my  love  for  a  church  that  is  greater  than  those  who 
govern  it,  stronger  than  those  who  defend  it.  Holding 
fast  by  the  heritage  left  me  by  my  fathers,  and  not  to 
be  rent  from  me  by  unjust  and  therefore  invalid  ex- 
communications, I  shall  devote  to  the  preparation  of 
the  kingdom  of  God  upon  earth  that  free  personal 
labor  which  is  the  common  duty  of  all  true  Christians. 

HYACINTHE. 


THE    SEQUEL   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  227 

From  France,  tossing  in  the  agony  of  her  terrible 
calamity,  this  touching  appeal  called  forth  no  answer- 
ing voice.  It  may  have  seemed  to  the  party  of  abso- 
lutism a  mere  cry  of  fruitless  despair,  the  wail  of  a 
dying  cause.  For  their  heart  seemed  more  fully  set 
in  them  than  ever  to  carry  through  their  victory  with 
a  high  hand.  They  proceeded  to  take  rigorous  meas- 
ures against  the  most  illustrious  of  those  scholars  who, 
speaking  in  the  name  of  theological  science,  had  pro- 
nounced the  doctrine  of  infallibility  to  be  in  contradic- 
tion to  the  facts  of  history,  and  the  citations  made  in 
defence  of  it  to  be  forgeries,  interpolations,  mutila- 
tions, and  perversions.  The  venerable  Dollinger  was 
summoned  by  his  archbishop  to  repudiate  that  which 
he  solemnly  believed  to  be  the  truth,  and  to  enunciate 
that  which  he  knew  to  be  falsehood,  under  penalty  of 
deposition  and  excommunication.  The  summons  was 
answered  on  the  28th  of  March,  1871,  by  a  memorial 
respectful  in  tone,  but  in  its  spirit  a  challenge  to  the 
hierarchs  of  the  church  to  meet  its  scholars  and  doc- 
tors and  disprove  the  indictment  of  fraud,  falsehood, 
and  oppression  which  he  there  put  on  record  against 
them.   • 

He  declared  himself  ready  to  prove — 

First,  that  the  texts  of  holy  Scripture  cited  in  de- 
fence of  the  decrees  of  the  Council  could  not  be  so  cited 
except  in  violation  of  the  solemn  oath,  sworn  by  every 
priest,  not  to  receive^  nor  interpret  the  holy  Scripture 
except  in  accordance  with  the  unanimous  consent  of 
the  fathers.* 

Secondly,  that  the  assertion  that  the  substance  of 
the  new  decrees  has  been  believed  and  taught  in  the 
church  always  and  everywhere,  or  almost  everywhere, 
*  See  above,  p.  10G. 


228  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

rests  on  an  entire  misapprehension  of  tradition,  and 
a  perversion  of  history,  and  is  in  direct  opposition  to 
the  clearest  facts  and  testimoni 

Thirdly,  that  the  bishops  of  the  Latin  countries, 
who  constituted  the  immense  majority  of  the  Council, 
had  been  misled  on  the  subject  of  the  papal  authority 
by  the  text-books  used  in  their  theological  ^training  ; 
the  passages  quoted  in  these  books  as  proofs  being 
false,  forged,  or  garbled. 

Fourthly,  that  the  new  decrees  are  in  direct  contra- 
diction to  decrees  of  former  (Ecumenical  Councils  con- 
firmed by  popes. 

Fifthly,  that  the  new  decrees  are  incompatible  with 
the  constitutions  of  the  states  of  Europe,  and  espe- 
cially with  that  of  Bavaria. 

This  brave  letter  concluded  with  the  following  wi  >r<ls : 

"Asa  Christian,  ax  a  theologian,  as  an  historian,  /n><l 
ax  a  citizen,  I  cannot  accept  this  doctrine. 

"Not  as  a  Christian;  for  it  is  irreconcilable  with 
the  spirit  of  the  gospel,  and  with  the  clear  declarations 
of  Christ  and  the  apostles.  It  seeks  precisely  to  erect 
a  '  kingdom  of  this  world '  such  as  Christ  repudiated — 
a  '  lordship  over  the  church '  such  as  Peter  forbade  to 
himself  and  to  all. 

"Not  as  a  theologian  ;  for  it  stands  in  irreconcila- 
ble contradiction  to  all  the  authentic  tradition  of  the 
church. 

"  Not  as  an  historian  ;  for  as  such  I  know  that  the 
constant  effort  to  realize  this  theory  of  universal  em- 
pire has  cost  Europe  rivers  of  blood,  has  devastated 
and  degraded  whole  countries,  has  ruined  the  noble 
fabric  of  the  constitution  of  the  ancient  church,  and 
has  engendered,  aggrandized,  and  perpetuated  in  the 
church  the  most  deplorable  abuses. 


THE    SEQUEL   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  229 

"Finally,  as  a  citizen,  I  must  reject  this  doctrine; 
because,  by  its  pretension  to  bring  states  and  mon- 
archs  and  the  whole  political  order  into  subjection  to 
the  papal  power,  and  by  the  exemptions  from  law  which 
it  claims  for  the  clergy,  it  prepares  the  way  for  dis- 
cords infinitely  mischievous  between  state  and  church, 
between  clergy  and  laity.  For  I  cannot  hide  from  my- 
self that  this  doctrine,  in  consequence  of  which  the 
ancient  German  empire  was  brought  to  ruin,  if  it 
should  once  become  dominant  in  the  Catholic  part  of 
the  German  nation,  would  implant  also  in  the  newly 
constituted  empire  the  germs  of  an  incurable  dis- 
order."* 

*  I.  von  Db'llinger's  Erklarung  an  den  Erzbischof  von  Miinchen- 
Freising.  Miinchen,  1871.  Dr.  Dollinger  appends  to  this  conclu- 
sion of  his  Declaration  the  following  from  the  pope's  official  organ* 
the  Civilta  Cattolica,  of  March  18,  1871 :  * '  The  pope  is  the  su- 
preme judge  of  the  law  of  the  land.  In  him,  the  two  powers,  the 
spiritual  and  the  secular,  meet  as  in  their  apex  ;  for  he  is  the  vice- 
gerent of  Christ,  who  is  not  only  a  Priest  for  ever,  but  also  King 
of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords.  .  .  .  The  pope,  by  virtue  of  his  high 
dignity,  is  at  the  summit  of  both  powers."  This  interpretation  of 
the  Vatican  decrees  will  of  course  be  repudiated  by  the  Koinish 
clergy  in  America.  But  is  it  not  authoritative  ?  Archbishop  Man- 
ning, who  claims  to  know  the  mind  of  the  pope,  although  he  may 
perhaps  not  equally  apprehend  the  expediency  of  disguising  it, 
presents  a  like  statement.  See  above,  in  Abp.  Kenrick's  Speech, 
p.  129  and  note.  We  have  since  found  Archbishop  Manning's 
utterance  at  Kensington,  there  quoted,  given  more  at  length,  and 
the  statement  is  so  condensed,  explicit,  and  authoritative,  that  it 
is  worth  repeating.  He  is  speaking  as  in  the  name  and  person  of 
the  pontiff: 

"You  say  I  have  no  authority  over  the  Christian  world,  that  I 
am  not  the  vicar  of  the  Good  Shepherd,  that  I  am  not  the  supreme 
interpreter  of  the  Christian  faith.  I  am  all  these.  You  ask  me  to 
abdicate — to  renounce  my  supreme  authority.  You  tell  me  that 
I  ought  to  submit  to  the  civil  power,  that  I  am  the  subject  of  the 
king  of  Italy,  and  from  him  I  am  to  receive  instructions  as  to  the 
way  I  should  exercise  the  civil  power.     I  say  I  am  liberated  from 


230  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

The  exposure  of  the  enormous  Insolence  and  the 
greedy  grasp  of  these  papal  pretensions  began  to  tell, 
not-only  upon  the  minds  of  scholars  and  of  intelligent 
private  Roman-catKolics,  but  upon  practical  states- 
men. It  had  been  in  vain  that  before  and  during  the 
sitting  of  the  Council,  efforts  had  bees  made  fco  com- 
bine the  administrators  of  European  goTernments  in  an 
effort  to  discourage  the  enactment  of  a  dogma  fraught 
with  such  political  mischiefs.    They  were  averse  to  any 

all  civil  subjection,  Hint  my  Lord  made  me  the  subject  of  no  one 
ill.  king  or  otherwise  ;  thftt  in  His  right  I  am  sovereign.  I 
acknowledge  no  civil  superior,  I  am  the  subject  of  no  prine 
I  claim  more  than  this — I  claim  to  be  the  Supreme  Judge  and 
director  of  the  consciences  of  men  ;  of  the  peasant  that  tills  the 
field  and  the  prinoe  that  sits  ou  the  throne  ;  of  the  household  that 
D  tin- shade  of  privacy  and  the  legislature  that  makes  laws 
for  kingdoms— I  am  the  sole  last  Supreme  Judge  of  what  is  right 
and  wrong." 

The  practical  political  bearing  of  this  theory,  now  become  the 
law  of  the  church,  may  be  illustrated  by  two  tacts  occurring  in  a 
single  American  diocese. 

In  February,  1856,  the  Rt.  Rev.  Bishop  of  Toronto  declared  in 
a  pastoral  letter  :  ' '  Catholic  electors  in  this  country  who  do  not 
use  their  electoral  power  in  behalf  of  separate  schools  are  guilty  of 
mortal  sin.  Likewise  parents  not  making  the  sacrifices  necessary 
to  secure  such  schools,  or  sending  their  children  to  mixed  schools. 

'  •  Moreover,  the  confessor  who  should  give  absolution  to  such 
parents,  elector*,  or  legislators  as  support  mixed  schools  to  the  preju- 
dice of  separate  schools  would  be  guilty  of  a  mortal  sin." 

Accordingly,  on  the  6th  of  July,  1856,  this  bishop  excommuni- 
cated Messrs.  Couchon,  Cartier,  Lemieux,  and  Drummond,  mem- 
bers of  the  Canadian  Parliament,  for  not  voting  straight  in  respect 
to  education  and  legacies  to  priests.  [Romanism  as  it  Is,  pp.  520, 
521,  586.] 

The  influence  of  the  hierarchy  and  the  confessional  on  nomi- 
nations, elections,  and  legislation  is  generally  a  secret,  even  from 
many  of  the  faithful,  who  stoutly  and  honestly  declare  that  it 
does  not  exist.  Ordinarily  it  is  revealed  to  outsiders  only  by  its 
effects,  which  are  sometimes  startling  enough,  as  the  history  of 
New  York  eitv  shows. 


THE   SEQUEL   OF    THE    COUNCIL.  231 

interference  with  the  mere  enunciation  of  abstract 
propositions  at  a  distance.  But  it  could  no  longer  be 
disguised  that  the  question  whether  Caesar  was  to  have 
the  things  that  are  Caesar's,  was  coming  to  a  practical 
issue.  The  hierarchy  of  Germany,  Jed  by  the  arch- 
bishop of  Munich,  hastened  to  oppose  the  letter  of  Dr. 
Dollinger  with  two  pastorals  under  their  joint  signa- 
tures, addressed,  one  to  the  clergy  and  the  other  to  the 
laity,  asserting  the  binding  authority  of  the  Vatican 
decrees,  denouncing  theological  science  in  Germany 
as  unfaithful  to  the  church,  and  nervously  denying  that 
the  Koman  dogmas  could  be  dangerous  to  civil  govern- 
ments— the  charge  was  "a  calumny."  But  one  thing 
was  evident,  alike  from  the  attack  and  from  the  defence 
and  disclaimer,  to  wit,  that  once  more  the  hierarchy 
had  waked  up  against  itself  an  old  antagonist  within 
the  church,  which  more  than  once  before  had  encoun- 
tered its  fiercest  terrors  without  flinching,  and  put  a 
barrier  to  its  exorbitant  pretensions.  This  antagonist 
was  The  Catholic  Universities, 

The  summary  proceedings  against  the  venerable 
Dollinger  had  the  effect  to  -draw  forth  some  indications 
of  sympathy  and  cooperation  from  the  insulted  govern- 
ments, and  to  rally  about  him  thoughtful,  seholarlike, 
and  courageous  men,  willing  to  share  the  persecution 
which  might  be  inflicted  on  him  for  the  declaration  of 
facts  which  were  as  well  known  to  themselves  as  to 
him.  The  answer  to  the  bishops'  pastorals,  published 
in  June,  1871,  stood  in  the  name,  not  of  Dr.  Dollinger 
alone,  but  of  more  than  thirty  persons,  eminent  in 
church  or  state,  or  in  literature  and  science.  It  was  as 
follows  : 


232  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

DECLARATION  OF  PROF.  DOLLINGER 
AND  HIS  ASSOCIATES. 

In  view  of  the  administrative  measures  and  the 
manifestoes  of  the  German  bishops  in  support  of  the 
decrees  of  the  Vatican,  the  undersigned  deem  it  neces- 
sary to  set  forth  in  the  following  declaration  the  prin- 
ciples on  which  they  act,  and  so  far  as  in  them  lies,  to 
offer  some  relief  for  the  burden  which  is  lying  on  men's 
consciences. 

I.  Faithful  to  the  inviolable  duty,  incumbent  on 
every  Catholic  Christian,  of  holding  fast  the  ancient 
faith,  and  repelling  every  novelty,  were  it  announced 
even  by  an  angel  from  heaven — a  duty  not  denied  by 
the  pope  or  the  bishops — we  persist  in  rejecting  the 
dogmas  of  the  Vatican.  Never  heretofore  has  it  been 
a  part  of  the  doctrine  of  the  church  or  of  the  Catholic 
faith,  that  every  Christian  should  recognize  in  the  pope 
an  absolute  master  and  sovereign  to  whom  he  is  directly 
and  immediately  subject,  and  to  whose  envoys  and  leg- 
ates he  owes  unconditional  obedience  in  everything 
touching  religious  faith  and  practical  morality.  It  is 
likewise  notorious  that  down  to  the  present  day,  it  has 
never  been  the  teaching  of  the  churcji  that  the  gift  of 
infalhbility  has  been  granted  to  a  man — that  is,  the 
X^ope  for  the  time  being — in  the  definitions  which  he 
addresses  to  the  whole  church  on  points  of  faith  and 
on  human  rights  and  duties.  On  the  contrary,  these 
propositions,  although  in  great  favor  at  Rome  and  en- 
couraged by  all  the  means  at  the  disposal  of  a  domi- 
nant power,  have  hitherto  been  nothing  but  scholastic 
opinions,  which  the  most  renowned  theologians  have 
been  at  liberty  to  attack  and  repudiate  without  exposing 
themselves  to  the  slightest  censure.      It  is  notorious 


THE   SEQUEL   OF   TPIE    COUNCIL.  233 

(and  if  the  German  bishops  do  not  know  this,  they 
ought  to  know  it)  that  these  doctrines  owe  their  origin 
to  falsehood,  and  their  diffusion  to  violence.  These 
doctrines,  in  the  form  in  which  they  have  been  pro- 
claimed by  the  pope  in  the  Vatican  decrees,  strip  the 
community  of  believers  .of  its  essential  rights,  deprive 
its  testimony  of  all  value,  destroy  the  authority  of 
ecclesiastical  tradition  and  the  fundamental  principles 
of  the  Catholic  faith,  according  to  which  Christians  are 
bound  to  believe  nothing  but  what  has  been  taught  and 
believed  always,  everywhere,  and  by  all  :  Quod  ubique, 
quod  semper,  quod  ah  omnibus.  Notwithstanding  the 
late  pastoral  of  the  German  bishops  affirms  that  Peter 
has  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  the  pope,  proclaiming  him- 
self infallible,  we  are  bound  to  repel  such  a  pretension 
as  a  blasphemy.  Peter  speaks  to  us,  clearly  and  intel- 
ligibly to  every  one,  in  his  acts  and  his  speeches  re- 
lated by  the  holy  Scriptures,  and  in  his  epistles,  which 
are  addressed  to  us  as  well  as  to  the  first  believers. 
These  acts,  speeches  and  epistles  are  animated  by  a 
totally  different  spirit,  and  contain  a  very  different 
doctrine  from  that  which  it  is  now  sought  to  impose 
upon  us.  The  attempt  has  been  made,  it  is  true,  to 
mitigate  these  new  doctrines,  which  in  their  crudity 
and  their  incalculable  sweep  wound  all  the  Christian 
feelings  ;  and  it  has  been  sought  to  persuade  the  peo- 
ple that  they  have  always  been  believed,  and  that  they 
cover  no  ensnaring  consequences.  '  Just  as  before,  in 
other  circumstances,  so  in  the  late  pastoral,  great  pains 
have  been  taken  to  present  the  infallibility  spoken  of 
in  the  new  decrees  as  a'  prerogative  pertaining  to  the 
whole  magisterium  of  the  church,  composed  of  pope  and 
bishops.  But  this  interpretation  is  in  contradiction  to 
the  clear  and  literal  sense  of  these  decrees,  according 


23i  THE    VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

to  which  the  pope  exclusively,  and  by  himself  alone,  is 
infallible  ;  he  it  is  to  whom  the  assistance  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  given,  and  who  in  his  decisions  remains  com- 
pletely independent  of  the  judgment  of  the  bisho] 

that  their  assent  to  every  papal  decision  wh; 

henceforth  obligatory,  and  cannot  be  refused  How- 
ever the  German  bishops  may  argue  that  the  plenitude 
of  power  with  which  he  is  invested  by  the  Vatican  de- 
crees cannot  be  considered  as  a  power  unlimited  and 
extending  to  everything,  because  the  exercise  of  it  is 
restrained  by  revealed  doctrine  and  the  divine  consti- 
tution of  the  church,  they  might  as  well  argue  that 
unlimited  and  despotic  power  does  n<>t  exist  anywhere 

in  the  world,  even  anion-"  the  Mohammedans,  because 
the  sultan  and  the  shah  of  Persia  themselves  acknowl- 
edge that  their  power  is  limited  by  the  law  of  (iod  ami 
the  dogmas  of  the  Koran.  By  the  new  decrees  tin- 
pope  is  not  only  invested  with  dominion  over  the  whole 
field  of  morality,  but  he  determines — still  by  himself 
alone,  and  with  the  authority  of  an  infallible  master — 
what  does  and  what  does  not  belong  to  this  domain, 
what  principles  are  ot  divine  obligation,  and  also  what 
interpretation  and  application  it  is  best  to  give  to  them 
in  particular  cases.  In  the  exercise  of  this  authority, 
the  pope  is  not  bound  to  receive  any  approval  outside 
of  himself  ;  he  is  accountable  to  no  one  on  earth,  and 
no  one  may  oppose  him.  Every  one,  prince  or  peasant, 
bishop  or  layman,  is  obliged  to  submit  without  condi- 
tion, and  obey  without  contradiction  his  every  com- 
mand. If  such  a  power  cannot  be  called  unlimited 
and  despotic,  there  never  has  been  unlimited  and  des- 
potic power  in  the  world,  and  there  never  will  be. 

II.  "We  persist  in  our  profound  conviction  that  the 
Vatican  decrees  constitute  a  serious  peril  to  the  state 


THE   SEQUEL   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  235 

and  to  society ;  that  they  are  incompatible  with  the 
laws  and  institutions  of  modern  states,  and  that  in 
accepting  them  we  should  be  entering  into  an  irrecon- 
cilable conflict  with  our  political  duties  and  oaths.  In 
vain  do  the  bishops  labor,  whether  by  affecting  to  be 
ignorant  of  them,  or  by  attempting  to  interpret  them 
in  their  own  fashion,  to  destroy  the  incontestable  fact 
of  the  existence  of  bulls  and  pontifical  decisions  which 
subject  all  powers  to  the  will  of  the  apostolic  see,  and 
which  condemn  in  the  most  absolute  way  the  laws  most 
indispensable  to  the  existence  of  modern  society.  The 
bishops  are  perfectly  well  aware  that,  by  virtue  of  the 
Vatican  decrees,  they  have  no  right  to  restrict  pontifi- 
cal decisions,  whether  old  or  recent,  by  artificial  inter- 
pretations, and  that  the  contradictory  explanation  of 
one  solitary  Jesuit  will  outweigh  that  of  a  hundred 
bishops.  In  this  very  matter,  the  interpretations  of  the 
German  bishops  are  in  opposition  to  those  of  other 
prelates,  particularly  those  of  the  archbishop  of  West- 
minster, Manning,  who  gives  to  the  papal  infallibility 
the  widest  imaginable  extent.*  And  consequently,  not- 
withstanding the  reproaches  addressed  to  us  by  the 
bishops,  Ave  consider  ourselves  fully  warranted  in  say- 
ing that  an  infallibility  such  as  it  is  wished  to  ascribe 
to  the  pope,  and  to  him  alone,  without  the  intervention 
of  any  other  party,  should  be  styled  a  personal  infalli- 
bility. This  expression  is  perfectly  exact,  and  in  ac- 
cordance with  the  usage  of  speech,  in  which  we  com- 
monly call  that  power  personal  which  is  possessed  and 
exercised  by  a  monarch  independently  of  the  other 
authorities  of  the  state.  Thus,  too,  an  official  preroga- 
tive is  called  personal  when  it  is  so  strictly  and  insep- 
arably attached  to  a  person  that  he  can  neither  divest 
*  See  above,  p.  229. 


23G  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

himself  of  it  nor  delegate  it  to  others.  When  we  com- 
pare (which  the  German  bishops  have  neglected  to  do) 
the  condemnations  pronounced  in  the  Syllabus,  (which 
has  now  become  a  decree  invested  with  the  papal  infal- 
libility,) the  solemn  condemnation  by  the  pope  of  the 

Austrian  constitution,  the  simultaneous  publicatio 

the  Jesuits  of  Laach,  Vienna,  and  Koine,  who  are  niueli 

better  informed  than  the  German  bishops  on  the  inten- 
tions of  the  Roman  Curia — when  we  compare  all  these 
with  the  Vatican  decrees,  we  must  be  blind  not  to  see 
an  ably-concerted  plan  tor  the  universal  monarchy  of 
the  popes.  Our  governments,  our  laws,  and  our  politi- 
cal constitutions,  everything  pertaining  to  morality,  the 
actions  of  each  individual— everything,  must  hence- 
forth be  submitted  to  the  Roman  Curia,  its  organs,  and 
its  legates,  whether  fixed  or  itinerant,  whether  bishops 
Or  Jesuits.  Sole  legislator  in  matters  of  faith,  disci- 
pline, and  morals,  supreme  judge,  sovereign,  and  irre- 
sponsible executioner  of  his  own  sentences,  the  pope, 
by  virtue  of  the  new  doctrine,  possesses  such  a  pleni- 
tude of  power,  that  the  most  ardent  imagination  can 
conceive  of  none  greater.  The  Cerman  bishops  might 
well  lay  to  heart  the  golden  words  pronounced  at 
Munich  by  the  Franciscan  Occam  in  a  situation  analo- 
gous to  our  own  :  "If  the  bishop  of  Rome  possessed  a 
plenitude  of  power  such  as  the  popes  falsely  lay  claim 
to,  and  such  as  many,  through  mistake,  or  in  the  spirit 
of  adulation  concede  to  them,  all  men  would  be  slaves  ; 
and  this  is  plainly  contrary  to  the  liberty  of  the  gospel 
law." 

III.  We  appeal  to  the  testimony  involuntarily  borne 
by  the  German  bishops  themselves  to  the  justice  of  our 
cause.  If  we  openly  and  directly  reject  the  new  doc- 
trine which  makes  the  pope  universal  bishop  and  abso- 


TOE    SEQUEL  OF   THE    COUNCIL.  237 

lute  master  of  every  Christian  in  the  whole  domain  of 
morals — that  is  to  say,  of  everything  that  one  may  or 
may  not  do — the  bishops,  for  their  part,  prove,  by  the 
different  and  contradictory  interpretations  given  in 
their  pastoral  letters,  that  they  apprehend  clearly 
enough  the  novel  character  of  this  doctrine,  and  the 
repugnance  it  excites,  and  they  make  it  plain  that,  at 
the  last  analysis,  they  are  ashamed  of  it  themselves. 
Not  a  man  of  them  has  had  the  <?ourage  to  follow  the 
example  of  Manning  and  the  Jesuits,  and  give  the  Vat- 
ican decrees  their  simple  and  natural  sense.*  But  they 
forget  that  if  they  were  to  apply  to  the  other  decrees 
on  matters  of  faith  efforts  like  those  they  employ  in 
their  pastorals  in  order  to  extenuate  the  meaning  of 
those  now  in  question,  they  would  soon  shake  the  solid- 
ity and  unity  of  doctrine,  and  produce  a  general  sense 
of  insecurity  and  uncertainty  throughout  the  whole  do- 
main of  faith.  In  fact,  what  would  be  left  of  certainty 
and  assurance  in  the  decisions  of  the  church,  old  or 
new,  if  they  were  all  to  be  treated  in  the  method  em- 
ployed by  the  late  pastorals  for  the  interpretation  of 
the  bull  of  Boniface  VIII. , f  and  if  people  were  to  fall 
into  as  flat  a  contradiction  as  they  have  in  the  present 
case,  with  the  literal  sense  of  the  decisions  and  their 
manifest  intention?  We  deplore  such  a  use  of  the 
teaching  power  of  the  bishops.  Still  more  profoundly 
do  we  deplore  that  these  bishops  have  not  been  ashamed, 
in  a  pastoral  addressed  to  the  Catholic  laity,  to  respond 
to  the  outcry  of  the  consciences  of  their  people  by  in- 
sults to  reason  and  learning.      Truly,  when  we  look 

[*  So  far  as  we  are  aware,  this  disposition  to  mince  the  matter 
is  as  prevalent  among  the  American  bishops  as  among  the  Ger- 
man. ] 

[f  The  bull  Unam  Sandam.     See  Abp.  Kenrick,  p.  125,  above.  ] 


238  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

back  from  these  men  who  seem  to  know  no  higher  duty 
than  that  of  blind  obedience,  towards  their  venerable 
predecessors  in  the  episcopate— like  Cyprian,  Athana- 
sius,  and  Augustine — we  feel  thai  we  have  better  excuse 
than  ever  St.  Bernard  had  for  letting  slip  that  sorrow^ 
fal  exclamation  :  Quia  nobis  dabti  videre  Ecdesiam  sicut 
erat  in  diebus  antiqx 

IV.  We  repel  the  threats  of  the  bishops  as  being 
out  of  accordance  with  law,  and  their  despotic  measures 
as  not  being  valid  nor  binding.  In  other  times,  through- 
out the  whole  church,  the  maxim  amis  held  in 
respect,  that  whenever  it  was  possible  to  show  the  time 
of  the  first  appearance  oi  any  doctrine,  it  was  a  sure 
proof  that  the   doctrine  was    fa  -   pre- 

cisely the  fact  in  the  case  of  the  new  doctrine  of  papal 
infallibility.      We  can  fix  exactly  tin-  tfi  appear- 

ance, the  persons  who  conceived  it,  and  the  int  • 
which  it  was  made  to  subserve.  In  former  times,  when 
popes  and  bishops  cut  off  from  the  communion  of  the 
church  the  authors  and  abettors  of  an  anti-Catholic 
doctrine,  they  vindicated  themselves  mainly  by  the  nov- 
elty of  the  doctrine,  and  its  opposition  to  the  old  tra- 
ditionary faith  ;  and  by  this  fact,  so  obvious  and 
to  be  proved,  that  their  opinion  had  not  been  thereto- 
fore received  as  part  of  the  divine  revelation,  the  ex- 
communicates might  be  convinced  of  the  justice  of  the 
sentence  pronounced  against  them  by  the  church.  Now, 
on  the  contrary,  for  the  first  time  (no  other  example  of 
it  can  be  found  in  the  course  of  eighteen  centuries) 
excommunication  is  fulminated  against  men,  not  for 
maintaining  and  propagating  a  new  doctrine,  but  be- 
cause they  would  preserve  the  ancient  faith  as  they 

[*   "Who  will  show  us  the  church  as  it  used  to  be  in  old 
times  ?*'] 


THE   SEQUEL   OF   THE   COUNCIL.  239 

have  received  it  from  their  parents  and  their  teachers 
in  the  school  and  in  the  church,  and  are  not  willing  to 
accept  a  different  doctrine,  nor  change  their  faith  as 
they  do  their  garments.  It  is  the  general  teaching  of 
the  fathers  of  the  church,  that  an  unjust  excommuni- 
cation does  not  harm  him  who  suffers  it,  but  only  him 
who  pronounces  it ;  and  that,  on  the  contrary,  God 
turns  into  a  source  of  grace  the  sufferings  of  those  who 
are  persecuted  for  righteousness'  sake.  We  know  that 
such  condemnations  are  as  invalid  and  destitute  of 
binding  force  as  they  are  unjust,  and  that  consequently 
they  cannot  deprive  believers  of  their  right  to  the 
means  of  grace  instituted  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
nor  take  from  priests  the  faculty  of  dispensing  them. 
We  are  resolved,  therefore,  that  we  will  not  suffer  our- 
selves to  be  robbed  of  our  rights  by  censures  inflicted 
in  the  interest  of  false  doctrines. 

V.  We  live  in  the  hope  that  the  conflict  which  has 
broken  out  shall  be,  under  the  direction  of  Providence, 
a  means  of  realizing  the  reformation  so  long  desired, 
and  now  become  inevitable,  in  ecclesiastical  affairs, 
both  in  the  constitution  and  in  the  life  of  the  church. 
As  we  look  towards  the  future  we  are  cheered  and 
comforted  amid  the  bitter  trials  of  the  present  confu- 
sion. If  at  present  we  meet,  in  all  parts  of  the  church, 
abuses  without  measure,  which,  fortified  and  put  be- 
yond the  reach  of  cure  by  the  triumph  of  the  Vatican 
dogmas,  might  grow  in  time  to  such  dimensions  as  to 
choke  all  Christian  life — if  we  perceive  with  grief  the 
tendency  towards  a  centralization  which  paralyzes  the 
mind,  and  towards  a  mechanical  uniformity — if  we 
consider  the  ever-growing  incapacity  of  the  hierarchy, 
which  knows  nothing  else  to  do  but  to  oppose  the  im- 
mense intellectual  movement  of  the  present  age  with 


240  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

conventional  phrases  and  impotent  imprecations — on 
the  other  hand  our  courage  revives  at  the  remembrance 
of  better  times,  and  we  put  our  trust  in  the  divine 
Ruler  of  the  church.  Looking  to  the  past  as  well  as 
to  the  future,  we  see  before  us  the  vision  of  the  regen- 
erated church  restored  to  its  true  ideal  to  that  condi- 
tion in  which  every  civilized  people  of  the  Catholic 
communion,  without  prejudice  to  its  union  with  the 
universal  ehurch,  but  liberated  front  the  yoke  of  arbi- 
trary domination,  shall  order  and  pel-feet  its  own  eccle- 
siastical constitution  in  accordance  with  its  own  charac- 
ter, and  in  harmony  with  its  peculiar  mission  of  civili- 
zation, through  the  agreement  and  mutual  cooperation 
of  clergy  and  laity  ;  and  in  which  all  Catholic  Christen- 
dom shall  be  placed  under  the  direction  of  a  primacy 
and  an  episcopacy  which,  through  their  learning  and 

the  active  part  which  they  shall  take  in  the  public  life 
of  the  people,  shall  gain  the  knowledge  and  capacity 
needful  to  reconquer  for  the  church  and  permanently 
to  secure  for  her  the  only  place  worthy  of  her — the 
place  she  ought  to  hold  at  the  head  of  universal  civili- 
zation. By  this  course,  and  not  by  the  decrees  of  the 
Vatican,  shall  we  make  progress  towards  the  supreme 
end  assigned  to  Christian  development,  that  is,  the  re- 
union of  the  other  Christian  communions  now  separa- 
ted from  us — a  union  desired  and  promised  by  the 
Founder  of  the  church,  and  longed-for  and  demanded 
with  an  ever-increasing  ardor  by  numberless  Christian 
believers,  both  in  Germany  and  elsewhere.  May  God 
grant  it  to  us  !* 

*  Not  having  the  original  of  this  document  at  hand,  we  have 
translated  from  the  authorized  French  version  published  in  con- 
nection with  the  manifesto  of  Father  Hyacinthe,  "  Ma  foi  el  ma 
conscience,"  bv  Dentu,  Paris. 


THE    SEQUEL   OF   THE    COUNCIL.  241 

The  combat  entered  upon  in  such  sober  earnest 
could  not  but  grow  more  and  more  active,  and  by  its 
relation  to  material  and  secular  interests  compel  the 
attention  of  the  civil  government,  and  of  that  part  of 
the  public  to  whom  its  merely  religious  aspect  had  no 
interest.  One  of  the  earliest  documents  of  the  contro- 
versy was  the  work  of  Professor  Yon  Schulte  of  Prague, 
one  of  the  first  scholars  in  Europe  in  Canon  Law — a 
work  which  deals  specially  with  the  relations  of  the 
irreparably  divided  Catholic  church  of  Germany  to  the 
state  and  to  the  church  property,  claiming  that  the 
Old  Catholics,  as  the  anti-infallibilist  party  began  to  be 
called,  were  the  true  representatives  of  that  institu- 
tion which  the  state  had  recognized  as  its  established 
church,  and  the  successors  to  its  "good  will"  and 
effects.* 

In  presence  of  a  revolt  so  resolute  and  serious, 
Rome  could  not  but  anathematize  and  excommunicate. 
Her  imprecations  fell  like  hail  upon  the  ranks  of  the 
Old  Catholic  party.  Priests  were  suspended  or  de- 
posed, schoolmasters  were  removed  from  office,  profes- 

*  A  brief  notice  is  given  in  The  Nation  of  November  2,  1871,  of 
an  article  in  the  Ilistorische  Zeitschrift,  probably  from  the  distin- 
guished pen  of  the  editor,  Von  Sybel,  which  "  discusses  the  Vati- 
can Council  from  the  point  of  view  in  general  of  Dollinger  and  the 
anti-infallibilists.  After  a  sketch  of  the  history  of  the  Council 
and  of  the  dogma  of  infallibility — in  which  the  striking  point  is 
made  that  this  was  the  first  Council  in  which  only  ecclesiastics 
sat,  and,  since  the  theologians  were  excluded,  only  the  higher  cler- 
gy--the  writer  proceeds  to  speak  of  the  future.  He  shows  that  the 
treaty  which  has  heretofore  existed  between  church  and  state 
assumes  the  Confession  of  Trent  as  its  basis.  If  the  church  dis- 
cards this  traditional  character,  and  its  relation  to  the  state  and  to 
other  confessions  is  essentially  altered,  the  contract  is  virtually 
broken,  and  the  other  party  is  freed  from  all  its  obligations.  It  is 
for  Germany  to  say,  then,  whether  the  primacy  of  Rome  is  any 
long'er  to  be  acknowledged." 

Vatican  Council.  \\ 


242  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

sors  were  stigmatized  as  heretical,  ami  students  warned 
against  their  teachings.  Every  combination  of  influ- 
ences was  brought  to  bear  to  make  sympathy  with  the 
obnoxious  party  costly   ami    dangerous  >r  the 

priest,  it  is  poverty,  dishonor  under  the  ban  of  interdict 

and  the  thunderbolt  of  anathema,  the  loss  of  this  min- 
istry of  the  altar  and  of  souls  to  which  in  youth  he  so 
joyously  offered  himself  a  sacriiice.  For  the  layman  it 
is  injury  in  the  good  name  and  estate  which  are  not 
merely  his,  but  which  he  holds  jointly  with  his  wife 
and  as  a  trust  for  his  children.  If  he  is  an  officeholder, 
he  compromises  his  promotion  under  an  ultramontane 
administration.  If  he  ifl  a  representative,  he  hazards 
his  election  ;  a  physician  or  lawyer,  his  practi< 
merchant,  his  business  connection:  a  citizen  in  any 
relation,  his  consideration  with  a  great  number  of  his 
fellow-citizens.  Must  I  mention,  in  conclusion,  one 
thing  more  painful  still? — he  hazards  the  peace  of  his 
Jireside  and  the  sanctity  of  his  shroud  and  bier!"* 

In  the  great  Eoman-catholic  state  of  Bavaria,  and 
elsewhere  in  Germany,  the  governments  refused  to  sus- 
tain the  sentences  of  the  hierarchy.  Deposed  ecclesi- 
astics, like  Friedrich  and  Dollinger,  continued  to  be 
recognized  as  holding  their  former  offices,  or,  as  a  more 
emphatic  rebuke  to  the  bishops,  were  advanced  in  dig- 
nity. And  while  schoolmasters,  thrust  from  their  em- 
ployment for  refusing  submission  to  the  new  dogma, 
were  restored  and  protected  by  the  state,  those  bishops 
who  had  hastened  to  promulgate  the  Vatican  decrees 
without  the  consent  of  the  government,  were  sharply 
admonished  that  they  had  rendered  themselves  liable 
to  pains  and  penalties  for  violation  of  public  law.    Thus 

*  Speech  of  Father  Hyacinthe  at  the  Old  Catholic  Conference, 
Munich,  September  23,  1871. 


THE  SEQUEL  OF  THE  COUNCIL.    243 

Peter  once  more  found  that  lie  who  takes  the  secular 
sword  may  perish  by  the  sword. 

But  a  far  more  important  matter  than  the  attitude 
of  the  governments  was  the  attitude  of  the  peoples. 
And  this  was  not  slow  in  being  manifested.  Addresses 
of  sympathy  flowed  in  from  every  quarter  to  the  men 
who  were  recognized  as  the  leaders  of  the  movement. 
To  one  of  these  were  attached  no  less  than  twelve 
thousand  signatures.  And  it  was  a  notable  thing  to 
what  a  great  extent  these  signatures  represented,  not 
in  all  cases  the  nobility  or  the  wealth  of  the  continent, 
but  its  thoughtfulness  and  learning.  The  new  growth 
had  struck  deep  root  in  the  universities.  As  if  to  em- 
phasize the  distinctive  character  of  the  struggle  as  an 
antagonism  between  ignorant  devotion  and  enlightened 
faith,  the  bishops  attempted  to  offset  the  moral  effect 
of  the  multitudes  of  the  Old  Catholic  addresses  and 
popular  assemblies,  by  gathering  mass-meetings,  which 
were  made  up  in  large  proportion  of  that  ignorant 
peasantry  on  whom  the  grasp  of  a  priesthood  is  always 
found  to  be  strongest. 

The  growing  movement  necessitated  a  general  con- 
ference for  consultation ;  and  the  assembling  of  such 
a  body  at  Munich  in  September,  1871,  marks  the  close 
of  the  brief  but  momentous  first  chapter  of  the  yet 
unwritten  and  unenacted  history  of  the  Old  Catholic 
church  after  its  disruption  from  the  Vatican  or  Neo- 
Catholic  church. 

Of  this  meeting,  it  is  sufficient  that  we  record  the 
document  which,  after  long  and  serious  debate,  was 
finally  adopted  as  a 


244  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

PROGBAMME    OF    THE    ANTI-INFALLIBIL- 
ITY LEAGUE. 

1.  A  proper  sense  of  our  religious  duties  compels 
OS  to  cling  to  the  Old  Catholic  tftith  as  laid  down  in 
Holy  Writ  and  tradition,  and  to  the  Old  Catholic  forms 
of  divine  service.  We  therefore  regard  ourselves  as 
legitimate  members  of  the  Catholic  church,  and  will 
not  be  expelled  from  that  church,  nor  do  we  renounce 
any  of  the  civil  or  ecclesiastical  rights  belonging  to  it. 

As   to    the    ecclesiastical    penalties   to    which    we    have 

been  subjected  for  adhering  to  the  old  faith,  we  declare 
them  arbitrary  and  absurd;  and  shall  not  thereby  be 
prevented  from  acknowledging  ourselves  and  acting  as 
true  and  Conscientious  sons  of  the  church.  Taking  our 
stand  upon  the  creed  contained  in  the  Symbol  of  Trent, 
we  reject  the  dogmas  proclaimed  under  the  pontificate 
of  Pio  Nono  as  contrary  to  the  doctrine  of  the  church 
and  to  the  principles  which  have  prevailed  since  the 
first  Council  was  assembled  by  the  apostles  ;  we  more 
especially  reject  the  dogma  of  infallibility  and  of  the 
supreme,  immediate,  and  ever- enduring  jurisdiction  of 
the  pope. 

2.  We  adhere  to  the  old  constitution  of  the  church. 
We  repudiate  every  attempt  to  restrict  the  right  of  the 
individual  bishops  to  direct  the  religious  concerns  of 
their  respective  dioceses.  We  repudiate  the  doctrine 
contained  in  the  Vatican  decrees,  that  the  poj)e  is  the 
only  divinely-appointed  exponent  of  ecclesiastical  au- 
thority, such  doctrine  being  at  variance  with  the  Canon 
of  Trent,  which  teaches  that  the  hierarchy  consists  of 
bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  and  that  this  hierarchy 
is  instituted  by  God.  We  acknowledge  the  primacy  of 
the  Koman  bishops  as  it  has  been   acknowledged  in 


ANTI-INFALLIBILITY    LEAGUE.  245 

accordance  with  the  testimony  of  Holy  Writ,  and  by 
the  testimony  of  the  fathers  and  councils  of  the  old 
undivided  Christian  church.  "We  furthermore  declare  : 
(a.)  That  more  is  required  to  define  dogmas  than 
the  dictum  of  some  temporary  pope,  backed  by  the 
consent,  tacit  or  expressed,  of  the  bishops,  who  have 
taken  the  oath  of  inviolable  obedience  to  their  primate. 
A  dogma  to  be  valid  must  be  in  accordance  with  Holy 
Writ  and  the  old  traditions  of  the  church,  such  as  they 
have  been  conveyed  to  us  in  the  writings  of  the  recog- 
nized fathers  and  decrees  of  the  councils.  Even  an 
oecumenical  council,  though  it  were-  really  oecumenical 
and  possessed  the  formal  qualifications  which  the  late 
Vatican  Council  lacked,  would  not  be  entitled  to  enact 
decrees  in  opposition  to  the  fundamental  truths  and 
the  past  history  of  the  church  ;  nor  would  such  illegal 
decrees  be  binding  upon  the  members  of  the  church, 
even  though  they  had  been  passed  unanimously.  And 
we  declare  : 

(b. )  That  the  dogmatic  decisions  of  a  council  must 
be  in  conformity  with  the  religious  belief  of  the  Catho- 
lic people ;  that  they  must  agree  with  Catholic  science 
and  the  original  and  traditional  faith  of  the  church. 
We  reserve  to  the  Catholic  clergy  and  laity,  as  well  as 
to  theological  scholars,  the  right  to  pronounce  an  opin- 
ion upon  and  protest  against  new  dogmas. 

3.  Availing  ourselves  of  the  assistance  of  theologi- 
cal and  canonical  science,  we  aim  at  a  reform  of  the 
church,  which,  in  the  spirit  of  the  ancient  church,  is  to 
do  away  with  the  abuses  and  short-comings  now  pre- 
vailing, and  satisfy  the  legitimate  wishes  of  the  Catho- 
lic people  for  a  regular  and  constitutional  share  in  the 
direction  of  ecclesiastical  affairs. 

We  maintain  that   the   reproach  of  Jansenism   is 


246  THE    VATICAN    COUNCIL. 

unjustly  cast  upon  the  church  of  Utrecht,  and  that, 
accordingly,  there  is  no  difference  of  dogma  between 
ourselves  and  that  church. 

We  hope  for  reunion  with  the  Greek,  Oriental,  and 
Russian  churches,  the  separation  of  which  from  the 
Catholic  church  arose  without  any  cogent  reason,  and 
is  prolonged  without  there  being  any  incompatibilities 
in  dogma  between  us  and  them. 

If  these  reforms  arc  carried  out,  and  the  road  of 
science  and  progressive  Christian  culture  is  steadily 
pursued,  we  expect  that  the  time  will  come  when  an 
understanding  will  be  effected  with  the  various  Protes- 
tant churches,  as  well  as  with  tlic  Episcopal  churches 
of  England  and  America. 

4.  In  educating  the  Catholic  clergy,  we  deem  it  in- 
dispensable that  they  should  be  introduced  to  the  study 
of  theological  science.  Considering  that  the  clergy 
exercise  a  great  influence  upon  the  intellectual  condi- 
tion of  the  people,  and  that  we  all  are  alike  interested 
in  possessing  a  pious,  moral,  intelligent,  and  patriotic 
clergy,  we  deem  it  dangerous  that  candidates  for  cler- 
ical honors  should  be  brought  up  in  a  state  of  artificial 
seclusion  from  the  culture  of  the  age,  as  is  now  the 
case  in  the  seminaries  and  other  similar  institutions 
directed  by  the  bishops.  "We  demand  aTlignified  posi- 
tion and  protection  from  hierarchical  tyranny  for  the 
members  of  the  lower  clergy.  We  deprecate  the  prac- 
tice recently  adopted  by  the  bishops,  in  imitation  of 
the  French  law,  of  arbitrarily  removing  clergymen  from 
one  parish  to  another  ;  (amovibilitas  ad  nutum.) 

5.  We  are  faithful  to  the  political  constitutions  of 
our  various  states,  because  they  guarantee  civil  liberty 
and  the  advance  of  the  humanizing  culture  of  man- 
kind.    We  therefore  reject,   from   motives  alike  con- 


ANTI-INFALLIBILITY   LEAGUE.  247 

nected  with  the  politics  of  the  day  and  the  history  of 
civilization,  the  treasonable  doctrine  of  papal  suprem- 
acy, and  promise  to  stand  by  our  respective  govern- 
ments in  their  struggle  against  ultramontane  principles 
as  reduced  to  dogma  in  the  Syllabus. 

6.  As  the  present  disastrous  division  in  the  Catho- 
lic church  has  been  notoriously  brought  about  by  the 
so-called  Society  of  Jesus ;  as  this  order  is,  moreover, 
abusing  its  power,  infecting  the  hierarchy,  the  clergy, 
and  the  people  with  tendencies  hostile  to  culture,  or- 
derly government,  and  national  progress ;  and  as  this 
order  teaches  and  inculcates  a  false  and  corrupt  system 
of  morals ;  we  express  our  conviction  thai  peace  and 
prosperity,  concord  in  the  church,  and  the  establish- 
ment of  proper  relations  between  church  and  society 
will  be  possible  only  after  the  injurious  action  of  this 
order  has  been  arrested. 

7.  As  members  of  that  Catholic  church  which  can- 
not be  altered  by  the  late  decrees  of  the  Vatican,  and 
which  has  had  its  existence  guaranteed  and  protected 
by  the  various  states,  we  maintain  a  right  to  the  secu- 
lar property  of  the  church. 

8.  Bearing  in  mind  that  in  the  programme  drawn 
up  at  Munich  last  Whitsuntide*  we  have  already  re- 
served our  right,  in  the  anomalous  condition  in  which 
we  are  placed,  to  have  the  ceremonies  of  the  church 
performed  by  priests  under  ecclesiastical  censure  ;  that 
in  the  same  programme  some  of  those  priests  have 
declared  their  willingness  to  perform  those  functions  ; 
that  we  are  justified,  by  necessity,  in  thus  going  back 
to  the  apostolical  times,  when  there  were  no  distinct 
parishes ;  that  the  having  recourse  to  such  priestly 
action  is  dependent  on  local  circumstances  and  indi- 

*  See  above,  pp.  232-240. 


248  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

victual  wants;  that  until  such  changes  in  the  law  can 
be  effected  as  will  satisfy  these  wants,  Catholics  adher- 
ing to  the  old  faith  of  their  church  cannot  be  left  with- 
out the  legal  benefit  of  certain  ecclesiastical  acts,  the 
Catholic  Congress  resolves  : 

(a.)  That  in  all  places  where  the  want  is  felt,  I •■ 
lar  parish  priests   shall  be  appointed,   the   question 
whether  there  is  a  want  being  left  to  the  decision  of  the 
local  committees. 

(b.)  We  claim  to  have  our  priests  recognized  by  the 
secular  authorities  as  entitled  to  perform  those 
gious  functions  on  which   civil  rights  are   based,  in 
accordance  "with  the  existing  legislation  of  many  states, 

(c.)  The  various  governments  arc  to  be  petitioned 
to  accord  us  these  rights. 

(<].)  Having  been  placed  in  the  condition  in  which 
we  find  ourselves,  every  Old  Catholic  is  entitled  to  ask 
foreign  bishops  to  perform  the  said  functions  for  liini  ; 
and  when  the  right  moment  has  come,  we  shall  be  jus- 
tified in  procuring  a  regular  episcopal  jurisdiction. 

The  paragraph  of  the  foregoing  paper  most  signifi- 
cant of  immediate  results,  is  the  last,  or  eighth.  It 
formed  no  part  of  the  original  draft  brought  before  the 
conference  by  a  committee  of  five  great  Catholic  schol- 
ars, led  by  Dollinger.  The  thought  of  the  decisive 
and  almost  irrevocable  organic  separation  from  that 
vast  corporation  which  they  had  all  their  lives  been 
wont  to  identify  with  the  kingdom  of  God  on  earth, 
was  utterly  distressing  to  them  ;  and  when  the  addi- 
tion was  moved,  they  opposed  it  with  all  their  might. 
Argument  and  persuasion  might  have  failed  to  change 
their  determination.  But  what  these  could  not  have 
done  was  wrought  bv  the  malice  of  their  enemies,  blind- 


ANTI-INFALLIBILITY   LEAGUE.  249 

ly  working  out  the  plans  of  God's  providence.  Eighty 
parishes,  which  very  early  in  the  history  of  the  contro- 
versy had  declared  their  adhesion  to  the  party  of  lib- 
erty, were  lying  under  interdict ;  the  dead  were  refused 
Christian  burial,  and  there  were  none  to  solemnize  the 
rites  of  baptism  and  marriage.  There  was  no  alterna- 
tive. 

From  the  beginning,  this  work  had  marched  on  to 
this  point  under  the  guidance  of  no  human  forethought, 
its  most  active  promoters  seeming  bound  by  a  power 
that  carried  them  whither  they  would  not.  Its  chief 
human  promoters  have  been,  in  fact,  its  enemies, 
"howbeit  they  thought  not  so."  The  history  of  its 
brief  past  helps  us  indistinctly  to  forecast  its  future, 
and  to  prophesy  that  the  main  interest  of  the  Pro- 
gramme, which  proposes  to  limit  this  new  growth  of 
religious  thought  by  the  Canons  of  Trent,  will  be 
mainly  interesting  to  the  future  historian  as  an  his- 
toric landmark  from  which  to  measure  its  advancement. 

Thus,  briefly,  ki  a  single  one  of  its  aspects,  have  we 
traced  the  history  of  two  of  the  most  momentous  years 
in  ecclesiastical  history.  And  if  our  hearts  and  sym- 
pathies have  constantly  been  with  those  who  in  the 
great  pending  struggle  have  been  the  champions  of 
personal  and  national  and  ecclesiastical  liberty,  and  of 
scriptural  and  historical  truth,  we  would  not  do  injus- 
tice to  those  on  the  other  side  who  may  have  been 
fighting  for  conscience'  sake.  It  is  possible  for  us  to 
recognize  the  fact  which  they  behold  so  clearly,  but 
which,  with  happy  inconsistency,  the  "Liberal  Catho- 
lic "  is  unable  to  perceive — that  despotism,  spiritual 
and  secular,  and  falsehood  to  science  and  to  history, 
arc  the  logical  result  of  the  premises  with  which  they 


250  THE   VATICAN   COUNCIL. 

start.  We  cannot  refuse  our  respect  to  a  certain  moral 
dignity  in  the  course  of  those  whose  steady  advocacy 
of  the  fatal  dogmas  was  not  actuated  by  the  spirit  of 
faction  nor  by  the  solicitation  and  corruption  of  the 
Roman  court,  but  by  a  steadfast  fidelity  to  those; 
wretched  principles  which  find  their  logical  fulfilment 
only  in  just  such  conclusions.  There  is  something  to 
admire  in  the  unmoved  resolution  with  which,  under 
such  convictions,  they  went  forward,  in  the  face  of 
signs  of  coming  disaster  that  even  a  child  could  read. 
to  enunciate  and  promulgate  the  blasphemous  dogma 
which  they  were  warned  would  revolt  the  intellect  and 
conscience  of  even  Roman-catholic  Christendom. 

The  only  parties  in  the  business  towards  whom  it  is 
impossible  even  for  charity  to  find  some  feeling  of  re- 
spect, are  the  corrupt  abettors  of  the  dogma;  and 
those  of  its  opposers  who,  having  known  and  declared 
it  to  be  a  falsehood,  nevertheless  proclaim  their  sub- 
mission to  it,  and  under  the  threat  of  Rome  consent  to 
lend  their  active  aid  to  enforce  upon  other  men  this 
"strong  delusion,  that  they  should  believe  a  lie.'' 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW 


AN  INITIAL  FINE  OF  25  CENTS 

WILL  BE  ASSESSED  FOR  FAILURE  TO  RETURN 
THIS  BOOK  ON  THE  DATE  DUE.  THE  PENALTY 
WILL  INCREASE  TO  50  CENTS  ON  THE  FOURTH 
DAY  AND  TO  $1.00  ON  THE  SEVENTH  DAY 
OVERDUE. 


MAY  27  1985 


REL  - 


MAY  9     1360 


, 


*=± 


} 


W^ 


« 


a_s_ 


R  17  1946 


tfW 


!S4 


m 


— 


*^- 


5^Sft 


l7Uay'60PW 


LD  21-100m-8,,34 


/ 


284720 


UNIVKRSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


